old CHC report - Innovation Network

C O N G R E S S I O N A L H U N G E R C E N T E R 

National Hunger Fellows Program 

Evaluation Report 

September 2004 

Fighting Hunger by Developing Leaders


Evaluation Report 

September 2004 

Patrick A. Corvington, Executive Director 

Veena Pankaj, Project Manager 

Innovation Network, Inc. 

1625 K Street, NW, 11th Floor 

Washington, DC 20006 

202-728-0727 

info@innonet.org 

www.innonet.org 

Submitted to: 

Kristin Anderson, Co-Director 


Congressional Hunger Center 

229 1 ⁄2 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE 


202-547-7022 ext. 17 

kanderson@hungercenter.org 

www.hungercenter.org

This project has been funded at least in part with funds 

from the USDA Food and Nutrition Service. The content 

of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views 

or policies of the Department, nor does mention of trade 

names, commercial products, or organiztions imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

ii National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report

October 2004 

Dear Congressional Hunger Center Supporters, 

It is my pleasure to share with you the attached Evaluation Report summarizing the highlights of 

ten years of CHC’s National Hunger Fellows Program. This comprehensive evaluation was conducted 

by Innovation Network, a Washington, DC-based nonprofit team of evaluators who provide their 

services to other nonprofits as a means of social change. This report includes input from 73% of the 

hunger fellow alumni, as well as many of our partners. 

Without the participation of these parties—hunger fellows and alumni, field and policy site 

supervisors, program Advisory Board members, former program directors, CHC Board Members, and 

contributors, this evaluation could not have been a success. You have our gratitude for your involvement 

and support! 

Those of us connected to the Emerson National Hunger Fellows Program are pleased that 

Innovation Network has concluded that the Hunger Fellowship is a “reputable, well-run program” 

that is “instrumental in developing young leaders in the anti-hunger/social justice field.” In fact, 

56% of hunger fellow alumni are currently employed in anti-hunger or social justice positions (while 

24% are currently enrolled in graduate school). For example, a member of the 9th Class reports: “The 

Fellowship enabled me to gain experience in doing meaningful work with excellent organizations while simultaneously 

exposing me to many leaders in the anti-hunger/social justice field and challenging me to think 

about how I can address inequality in society.” 

The combined experience of field and policy work that the Emerson Hunger Fellowship provides 

is unique, and this distinctiveness was captured by hunger fellow alumni in the program evaluation: 

“The exposure to real communities across the country along with the policy experience, it’s a great 

balance . . . important change must and does take place on the ground and on the Hill and I was honored to 

meet . . . people involved in both movements.” (Hunger Fellow, Class 7) 

Of course, we owe thanks to our many private sector contributors, including General Mills, The 

UPS Foundation, Altria, Presbyterian Hunger Fund, MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger, Victory 

Wholesale Grocers, Proctor and Gamble, Grocery Manufacturers of America, and Mr. Al Franken. In 

closing, I’d like to extend a special thank you to Ambassador Tony Hall, Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, Rep. 

James McGovern, the U.S. Congress, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture for making it possible 

for more than 200 young people to increase access to food and a better life for thousands of poor 

individuals and families! 

Sincerely, 

Edward M. Cooney 

Executive Director

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 

Introduction and Evaluation Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

Key Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

Background and Historical Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 

Major Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Perceptions of the National Hunger Fellowship Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Evolution of the Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Program Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

Leadership Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Impact on the Fight Against Hunger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Value of Field and Policy Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Impact on Career . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 

The Relatedness of Field and Policy Placements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

Appendices 

Appendix 1: Data Collection Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 

Appendix 2: Alumni Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 

Appendix 3: Current Fellows Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 

Appendix 4: Evaluation Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 

iv National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report

Executive Summary 

The fellowship program 

has evolved into a 

reputable, well-run 

program that has 

been instrumental 

in developing 

young leaders in the 

anti-hunger/social 

justice field. 

The Congressional Hunger Center (CHC) 

contracted with Innovation Network, Inc. to 

assess the overall impact of the National Hunger 

Fellowship Program on participating fellows as 

well as on the national fight against hunger. 

This report highlights evaluation results from 

Innovation Network’s comprehensive analysis of 

survey and interview data gathered from various 

stakeholders of the program. Key findings are 

framed in the context of the evaluation questions 

listed below. 

What are the overall perceptions of the 

National Hunger Fellows Program The fellowship 

program has evolved into a reputable, 

well-run program that has been instrumental in 

developing young leaders in the anti-hunger/ 

social justice field. In general, people have a positive 

perception of the program, regardless of its 

initial growing pains. Not only has the fellowship 

program grown in reputation, but the number 

of people applying to the program has greatly 

increased, making the selection process highly 

competitive. The dedication and commitment of 

Congressional Hunger Center staff are credited 

with many program successes. 

How has the program evolved over the 

past ten years The fellowship program was 

initially funded through a Volunteers in Service 

to America (VISTA) grant. The passing of the 

Agriculture Appropriations Bill in 2000 marked 

a watershed for the program, increasing the 

program’s flexibility. In the earlier years of the 

program there was more emphasis on fellows’ 

field experience; this emphasis has shifted over 

the years and the program is currently more 

focused on the policy experience. To staff the 

fellowship program, in the past, CHC mainly 

recruited recent graduates of the fellowship program 

who were looking for the next logical step 

after the fellowship. However, as program funding 

has become more stable, the Center has been able 

to invest in hiring more permanent staff members 

who view their positions as their careers. 

What are the primary benefits of the 

program experienced by the participants 

Innovation Network’s analysis illustrates that the 

key benefits experienced by program participants 

include: professional development, an increased 

awareness of anti-hunger and related issues, 

increased number of connections and networking 

opportunities, bonds formed with other fellows, 

and leadership experience. Many Fellowship 

participants have had varying degrees of antihunger 

experience in the field and policy arenas; 

the program helps tie in both perspectives, giving 

participants a broader picture of how to combat 

hunger. The combination of both field and policy 

experience offers fellows a unique perspective that 

provides context and understanding of hunger in 

the United States. 

To what extent has the program been successful 

in developing leaders in the field The 

National Hunger Fellows Program has been instrumental 

in grooming future leaders. Coming at 

an influential time in fellows’ lives, the program 

helps to sharpen fellows’ thinking and provides 

them with a real context that prepares them for 

life after the fellowship. Based on Innovation 

Network’s conversations with former program 

directors and fellows, the program opens up individual 

opportunities for work, growth and formation 

that may not have previously existed. Survey 

results indicate that a majority of the fellows have 

been involved in some form of leadership activities 

since completing the program. The fellowship 

is based on the premise that after completing the 

program, participants will continue working for 

social justice organizations. According to a report 

published by Independent Sector, nonprofit sector 

employment represents 9.5 percent of total 

employment in the United States. It is interesting 

to note that approximately half of the individuals 

who participate in the fellowship experience are 

currently working in the nonprofit sector. While 

individuals applying to the fellowship program 

may have already had a propensity to work with 

National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report v

Executive Summary 

The National Hunger 

Fellows Program has 

been instrumental in 

grooming future leaders. 

Coming at an influential 

time in fellows’ lives, 

the program helps 

to sharpen fellows’ 

thinking and provides 

them with a real context 

that prepares them for 

life after the fellowship. 

nonprofits, Innovation Network’s analysis reveals 

that the fellowship program did inspire a commitment 

among participants to continue working for 

social justice. 

What are the most valuable and least 

valuable aspects of the field and policy placements 

The field and policy placements form 

the core of the fellowship experience, and helped 

create unique learning opportunities for participants. 

Participants value many aspects of field 

placement, including: 

● The experience of being immersed in local 

communities, 

● Access to positive mentors/role models in 

the field, and 

● The opportunity to take on leadership roles. 

Some of the challenges fellows face in the field 

include: 

● Poor working conditions within the host 

organization, and 

● Difficulties that arose within the host site. 

The most valuable aspects of the fellows’ 

policy experience are: 

● Exposure to interactions between various 

government agencies, 

● Increased opportunities to network, and 

● The opportunity to practice skills sets that 

enhance professional development. 

Participants also faced challenges in policy 

placement, notably a feeling of detachment 

between the work being done and its actual 

impact on hunger, and a lack of ownership over 

the work being completed. 

To what degree has the National Hunger 

Fellows Program been successful in influencing 

the career choices of individual fellows 

One of the main theories behind the program 

is that young adults who are provided with an 

intense experience in both policy and fieldwork 

will have a better sense of what they want and 

don’t want to pursue in their career. Innovation 

Network found that exposure to multiple 

approaches to solving hunger helps participants 

determine their own interests. Our findings 

illustrate that participating in this program helps 

fellows make educated decisions about what paths 

to follow after completing the fellowship. 

Do the field and policy placements need to 

be more connected in content areas One of 

the issues that the Congressional Hunger Center 

has struggled with is whether or not to form a 

more purposeful connection between field and 

policy placements by intentionally relating the 

subject matter of the two placements. A majority 

of the individuals interviewed for this evaluation 

indicated that they prefer no deliberate 

connection between the two placements, unless 

specifically requested by the fellow. One of the 

positive characteristics of the program is that it 

provides fellows with a broad understanding of 

how to fight hunger in the United States. The 

current structure allows participants the flexibility 

to work on a number of different hunger-related 

issues. Relating the content area of the two placements 

may cause fellows to miss out on a key 

experience. 

The evaluation report that follows illustrates 

the above findings with data from Innovation 

Network’s evaluation surveys and interviews. 

Innovation Network gathered data from program 

alumni, current fellows, former program directors, 

staff members, site supervisors, and a board 

member to highlight the successes and challenges 

of the program and to form a basis for making 

recommendations for improving program impact. 

vi National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report

Introduction and Evaluation Focus 

The level of responsibility 

and unique combination 

of field and policy 

experiences offered by 

the program provides 

participants with the 

skills and confidence 

necessary to be a leader 

in the field. 

The Congressional Hunger Center is celebrating 

the ten-year anniversary of its National 

Hunger Fellows Program. This program’s goal is to 

develop hunger-fighting leaders with an in-depth 

understanding of hunger and poverty at both the 

local and national level. Each year, the organization 

recruits 20–24 young adults to take part in a 

year-long leadership program. Fellows undergo a 

six-month field placement where they work directly 

with a grassroots organization in the United 

States. During this time, fellows have the opportunity 

to gain first-hand knowledge of communitylevel 

hunger problems affecting many parts of 

the country. Following the field placement, each 

fellow is given the chance to spend six months in 

Washington, D.C., working with a national organization 

involved in the anti-hunger/anti-poverty 

policy arena. The premise of this program is that 

with the combined field and policy experience, 

fellows will be better positioned to find innovative 

solutions and create the political will to 

end hunger. 

In the fall of 2003, the Congressional Hunger 

Center contracted with Innovation Network, 

Inc., to assess the overall impact of the National 

Hunger Fellowship Program on participating 

fellows and on the national fight against hunger. 

This evaluation report presents a comprehensive 

analysis of interview and survey data gathered 

from program alumni, current fellows, former 

program directors, site supervisors, Board members, 

and Congressional Hunger Center staff. 

This report highlights the structural nature of 

the program and includes suggestions on how 

to improve the overall fellowship experience for 

participants. The principal goal of this report is to 

inform the following questions: 

● What are the overall perceptions of the 


● How has the Program evolved over the past ten 

years 

● What are the primary benefits of the program 

experienced by participants 

● To what extent has the program been successful 

in developing leaders in the field 

● What are the most valuable and least valuable 

aspects of the field and policy placements 

● To what degree has the National Hunger 

Fellows Program been successful in influencing 

the career choices of individual Fellows 

● Do the field and policy placements need to be 

more connected in content areas 

Current Hunger Fellows and 

Alumni come together at 

Washington, D.C.’s Capital 

Area Food Bank 

National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report 1

Key Findings 

With the supportive 

experience of the 

program to get them 

started, many fellows 

devote their professional 

lives to social causes— 

years after the program 

is over. 

Innovation Network’s analysis reveals that the 

fellowship program has made a very strong 

impact on those who participate. 

The program is specifically geared towards 

developing leaders in the anti-hunger/social 

justice area. Participants who have gone through 

the fellowship program have been able to demonstrate 

elements of leadership as evidenced 

by the type of work and volunteer activities they 

continue to be involved in. Many fellows have 

pursued graduate degrees and have taken on 

leadership roles in the organizations with which 

they work. Over the course of their fellowship, 

participants are engaged in hunger-related issues 

at both the community and national level. The 

level of responsibility and unique combination 

of field and policy experiences offered by the 

program provides participants with the skills and 

confidence necessary to be a leader in the field. 

The program has been instrumental in influencing 

the career choices of participating 

fellows. The opportunity to work in local communities 

and at the national level provides participants 

with a better understanding of where their 

interests lie. Many fellows form a strong preference 

for either the community or the national 

level of work by the completion of the program. 

During their policy placement, fellows have the 

opportunity to meet with even more professionals 

in the anti-hunger/anti-poverty field through 

the Professional Development Days, designed 

specifically to help fellows learn about available 

career options. Few leadership programs are able 

to provide such diverse experiences in a one-year 

time frame. 

Hunger Fellow Darcy O’Brien and friends in Idaho 

A majority of the participating fellows stay 

involved in the social justice field, even 

after completing the program. Fifty-six percent 

of the 122 alumni surveyed indicated that their 

current job addresses anti-hunger or related social 

justice issues. Most fellows leave the program 

with a strong desire to stay connected to the field, 

bolstered by a network of professional connections 

that can help guide their careers. With the 

supportive experience of the program to get them 

started, many fellows devote their professional 

lives to social causes—years after the program is 

over. 

The fellowship program has been successful 

in creating and expanding the fellows’ professional 

network. Over the course of their participation, 

fellows have access to a wide array of 

contacts from their field and policy placements, 

Professional Development Days, and the community 

of peers they form over the course of their 

fellowship. Innovation Network’s analysis reveals 

that many of the fellows continue to stay in 

touch with their peers and professional contacts 

after completing the program. 

Fellows are having a positive impact on the 

communities they serve. Community impact is 

most directly demonstrated through the projects 

accomplished during the field placement, when 

fellows work directly in communities where 

people are affected by hunger. This experience 

allows fellows to see first-hand the impact of their 

work. 

2 National Hunger Fellows Program Evaluation Report

Background and Historical Context 

In 1984 the United States Congress established 

the Select Committee on Hunger to 

help address both international and domestic 

hunger issues. The Committee was founded 

by Representatives Ben Gilman (NY), Mickey 

Leland (TX), and Bill Emerson (MO), and was first 

chaired by Rep. Leland. Following the death of 

Rep. Leland in 1989, the committee was chaired 

by Rep. Tony P. Hall of Ohio. During this time, 

hundreds of hearings were held and legislation 

passed that strengthened U.S. efforts to mitigate 

and eliminate the worldwide problem of hunger. 

In 1993, the 103rd Congress eliminated the 

Select Committee on Hunger, along with several 

other select committees, as a cost-cutting 

measure. In response to this act and to draw 

attention to the worldwide problem of hunger, 

Chairman Hall went on a 22-day hunger fast, 

generating publicity that resulted in the formation 

of two new anti-hunger establishments: the 

Congressional Hunger Caucus in the House of 

Representatives, later eliminated by the 104th 

Congress, and the Congressional Hunger Center 

(“CHC”), established by Representatives Hall and 

Emerson as a charitable and educational 501(c) 3 

tax-exempt organization. 

In 1994 CHC initiated a challenge grant from 

VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) to establish 

a model anti-hunger leadership program. This 

program has endured and evolved over the years, 

celebrating its tenth anniversary in 2004. 

The Co-Chairs of the CHC Board are 

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) and Rep. James 

McGovern (D-MA). The Board includes other 

Members of Congress, representatives of private 

industry, and members of the advocacy community. 

Currently the Congressional Hunger Center 

has a staff of ten. 

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson and 

Rep. James P. McGovern, 

Board Co-Chairs 


Methodology 

For this evaluation, Innovation Network gathered 

information from multiple stakeholders. 

Data was collected using the methods illustrated 

in Table 1 below. 

Table 1: Sources of Data: Breakdown by Method 

Source of Data 

Electronic Surveys 

Number of Respondents 

Alumni (Class 1 through 9) 122 

Current Hunger Fellows (Class 10) 23 

Key Informant Interviews 

Alumni 7 

Site Supervisors 3 

Former Program Directors 3 

CHC Staff 4 

Board Members 1 

Table 2: Survey Respondents by Fellowship Class 

Number of Alumni 

Percentage of Class 

Class 1 (Year ’94-’95) 7 6% 

Class 2 (Year ’95-’96) 12 10% 

Class 3 (Year ’96-’97) 16 13% 

Class 4 (Year ’97-’98) 9 7% 

Class 5 (Year ’98-’99) 12 10% 

Class 6 (Year ’99-’00) 12 10% 

Class 7 (Year ’00-’01) 19 16% 

Class 8 (Year ’01-’02) 19 16% 

Class 9 (Year ’02-’03) 16 13% 

Total 122 100% 

N=122 Percentages have been rounded 

Number of 

Current Fellows 

Percentage of 


Class 10 (Year ’03-’04) 23 96% 

N=23 

Innovation Network administered the electronic 

survey to 168 program alumni, with a 

seventy-three percent response rate (122 completed 

surveys). In addition, the current class of 

24 Hunger Fellows was surveyed, with a ninetysix 

percent response rate (23 completed surveys). 

These surveys helped Innovation Network identify 

general trends and themes among the fellows 

who have participated in the program. Please refer 

to Appendix 1-A for the survey instruments. 

Following up on trends that appeared in the 

survey data, Innovation Network interviewed 

key stakeholders. Speaking to a variety of people—people 

who were involved in the program 

in various roles and at different points over the 

years—helped Innovation Network build a comprehensive 

understanding of the National Hunger 

Fellows Program. Please see Appendix 1-B for copies 

of the interview protocols. The combination of 

the data obtained from the surveys and key-informant 

interviews provided multiple perspectives to 

help inform this evaluation. 

Who Completed the Survey 

Innovation Network received completed surveys 

from both current fellows and alumni. 

Alumni 

As expected, the response rate from the first 

class was low, 1 but all other classes showed a fairly 

even span of results. Table 2 is a breakdown of the 

alumni who completed the survey by class. 

What did alumni do immediately after the Program 

Sixty-four percent of the alumni who completed 

the survey obtained employment within 

the first year of completing the National Hunger 

Fellowship Program. Eighteen percent attended 

graduate school; nine percent did both. 2 

1 

We expected a low response rate from the first class because they are 

ten years removed from the program. 

2 

Thirteen percent indicated that they did something other than attending 

graduate school or obtaining employment after completing 

the fellowship program. Refer to Table 8 in Appendix 2. 


Sixty-seven percent of those alumni who 

obtained employment within the first year of 

completing the program indicated that their position 

addressed anti-hunger or other related social 

justice issues “a great deal”. 3 

Figure 1. Relatedness of First Job to Anti-Hunger/Social Justice 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N=87 

 

 

Table 3. Graduate Degrees Pursued by Fellows 

Degree Number Percentage 

JD 15 21% 

MD 8 11% 

MPP/MPA 9 13% 

MSW 6 8% 

MPH 8 11% 

Other 24 34% 

Total 70 98% 

N=71 Percentages are rounded 

Among those alumni who pursued a job 

within the first year after completing the fellowship, 

seventy-five percent worked in the nonprofit 

sector. 4 Seventy-two percent of the alumni who 

took part in this survey pursued a graduate degree 

at some point after completing the fellowship 

program. 5 Twenty percent of the respondents 

went to graduate school within one year after 

completing the program, while forty-nine percent 

are currently enrolled in a graduate program. 

Table 3 is a breakdown of the type of degrees 

pursued by program alumni. 

Among those that pursued graduate school, 

sixty-nine percent indicated that the National 

Hunger Fellows Program influenced their decision 

to pursue their chosen degree. 6 

Since graduating from the Fellowship Program, 

fifty-two percent of the alumni indicated that 

they worked in the nonprofit sector; nine percent 

indicated they have worked in the public sector; 

and thirty-one percent have worked in both the 

public and nonprofit sectors. 7 

This data illustrates that the fellowship experience 

influences next steps taken by participants 

after the program is over. Since many of the fellows 

had a strong preference towards social justice 

and anti-hunger work before applying to the program, 

the assumption that the fellowship alone 

influenced individuals to pursue this line of work 

cannot be made. However, it can certainly be 

inferred that the fellowship experience broadened 

participants’ understanding, opened up options, 

and strengthened their desire to continue in the 

field. 

3 

Refer to Table 11 in Appendix 2 for more details. 

4 

Refer to Table 9 in Appendix 2. Percentage sited in text of report uses 

a sample size of n=87 (only looking at those alumni who pursued a 

job within the first year after completing the program). 

5 

Refer to Table 2 in Appendix 2. 

6 

Refer to Table 5 in Appendix 2. Sixty nine percent of the 72 fellows 

who attended graduate school indicated that the fellows program 

influenced their decision to pursue a graduate degree. 

7 



Methodology 


Current fellows were surveyed to gauge their 

plans after the program is over. 8 While the survey 

results were informative, Innovation Network 

did not rely on it as strongly in this evaluation, 

because the survey was administered when the 

current fellows were only halfway through the 

program. The true impact of the program on this 

group is yet to be seen. 

Table 4: Current Fellows’ Plans After Completing Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Attend Graduate School 7 30 

Obtain Employment 11 48 

Attend Graduate School and Obtain Employment 3 13 

Other 2 9 

Total 23 100 

The survey asked the current fellows what they 

plan to do immediately after the program. Fortyeight 

percent plan on obtaining employment and 

30 percent plan on attending graduate school 

(Table 4). 

Among those who would like to attend 

graduate school: 

● Fifty-seven percent would like to pursue a JD, 

● Twenty-nine percent would like to pursue an 

MD, and 

● Fourteen percent would like to pursue an MPH. 

Among current Fellows who plan on obtaining 

employment in the first year: 

● Seventy-three percent would like to work in 

the nonprofit sector 

● Eighteen percent would like to work in the 

public sector 

● Nine percent would like to work in the 

private sector 

All of the Current Fellows who responded to 

the survey indicated that they believe they will 

continue to be involved in anti-hunger/poverty 

issues after the completion of the program. 

Hunger Fellows (in disguise) 

and friends in Tucson, AZ 

8 

See Table 2 of Appendix 3 for more details. 


Major Themes 

Many respondents feel 

that the success of the 

program can be largely 

attributed to the staff 

of the Congressional 

Hunger Center. Site 

supervisors emphasize 

the diligence with which 

CHC trains fellows so 

they are ready to get to 

work immediately after 

arriving at the host site. 

The major themes identified below reflect the 

structure of Innovation Network’s Evaluation 

Plan. The evaluation questions were designed to 

shed light on each of the areas below. 

Perceptions of the National Hunger 

Fellowship Program 

In general, people have a positive perception 

of the National Hunger Fellows Program. Data 

gathered from program alumni, site supervisors 

and former program directors indicate that 

although the program experienced some initial 

structural problems, it has improved with each 

class. Fellows, especially from earlier classes, 

report that the program has overcome its initial 

growing pains. From what they know of the program 

today, they feel that fellows are having very 

positive experiences. 

In addition to improved program quality, 

the caliber and quantity of applicants has also 

increased. Now, with over 200 applicants applying 

for the program annually, there is a highly 

competitive selection process. Recent alumni also 

feel that the level of experience obtained through 

the program is distinctive from other types of programs. 

As mentioned earlier, the balance between 

field and policy experience is seldom seen in 

other leadership programs. 

Many respondents feel that the success of the 

program can be largely attributed to the staff of 

the Congressional Hunger Center. Site supervisors 

emphasize the diligence with which CHC trains 

fellows so they are ready to get to work immediately 

after arriving at the host site. While much of 

the current success of the program can be accredited 

to the current staff, it will be important for 

the Hunger Center to institutionalize the program 

so that its success can be carried forward, even 

with new staff members. 

Program stakeholders also had positive comments 

about the commitment and drive of the 

Congressional Hunger Center’s staff, best illustrated 

by the following comment from a current 

fellow: 

The Congressional Hunger Center is incredible. I’m 

moved and impressed by the scope and depth of 

their commitment, and by the program staff. They 

do an incredible job of exposing us to interesting 

and helpful people and opportunities. The program 

is well structured, organized and it inspires as well 

as it teaches. CURRENT FELLOW 

Site supervisors and program alumni expressed 

that the willingness and openness of the staff 

to hear new ideas and listen to suggestions has 

helped improve the quality of the program over 

time. 

Staff are listening to our suggestions, they are open 

to our suggestions. They aren’t defensive about 

constructive criticism. They are 150% committed 

to this program and consistently trying to make 

it better. Because of their hard work . . . it has become 

a much better program. Every time I’ve given 

a speech, the Center staff have been there. Whether 

it’s talking to college groups, the national student 

campaign against homelessness and hunger, to 

just improving projects. They are all over it. 

SITE SUPERVISOR 

Comments from individuals that have been 

involved in the program, either as site supervisors 

or as fellows, indicate a high degree of 

overall satisfaction with the program outcomes. 

These contributors and participants feel that the 

National Hunger Fellows Program is one of the 

best leadership development programs that provide 

anti-hunger field and policy experience. 

Evolution of the Program 

The National Hunger Fellows Program has 

undergone a few structural changes over the past 

ten years. During the first six years, the program 

was funded by VISTA (Volunteers in Service 

to America). The passing of the Agriculture 

Appropriations Bill in 2000 marked a watershed 

for the program. 


Major Themes 

The changeover from VISTA funding freed up the 

program to do different things. There were a lot of 

strings that came with VISTA funding . . . I think 

being free of VISTA funding allows the program 

to go in directions that they weren’t able to go 

before. FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

The Congressional Hunger Center was no 

longer required to follow the strict requirements 

imposed by VISTA, and had more freedom to 

make changes to the program to help enhance 

the overall fellowship experience. As the program 

switched over from VISTA funding, the administration 

of the program gradually changed. Some 

of the more notable shifts in the program include: 

A shift in focus from the field to policy 

experience. One of the initial assumptions of 

the program was that fellows would benefit more 

from direct service experience. In the program’s 

earlier years, there was more emphasis placed 

on the field experience: approximately seventy 

percent of the fellows were placed at food banks. 

This focus has gradually shifted over the years, 

to a greater emphasis on the policy experience. 

Conversations with current staff members 

indicate that this field-to-policy shift may have 

resulted from new staff who took a new, more 

systemic approach to addressing hunger issues. 

The attributes of the program’s applicants also 

changed over the years: many prospective fellows 

had already gained direct service experience in 

college, and were looking for a fellowship experience 

that would enable them to better engage in 

the policy process. 

Fellows return from their field experience in 

February of each program year and receive extensive 

training on policy issues. This training, which 

lasts roughly eleven days, includes discussion of 

important policy issues and processes. Highlights 

include: 

● Expert policy briefings on the reauthorization 

of important anti-hunger/anti-poverty policies 

(such as TANF and the Child Nutrition 

Programs); 

● An overview of the federal budget process and 

a refresher course on “U.S. Government 101”; 

● Participation in the national Anti-Hunger 

Policy Conference sponsored by the Food 

Research and Action Center, America’s Second 

Harvest, and the National CACFP Forum; 

● A tour of the Capitol Complex; 

● Meetings with Representatives, Senators, and 

other Capitol Hill staff representing field site 

host communities; and 

● An opportunity to connect with policy experts 

and former hunger fellows. 

An increased ability to hire more permanent 

staff. In the earlier program years, the 

Hunger Center hired alumni. While this proved 

to be effective in recruiting staff members with 

a solid understanding of the program and also 

served as an opportunity for recently graduated 

fellows to continue their learning, program directors 

didn’t stay long because of the low compensation 

levels and an interest in pursing a graduate 

degree. This made it challenging to build institutional 

knowledge within the organization. With 

the changes to the organization’s funding streams 

in 2000, the Hunger Center was able to invest 

the necessary funds to hire more permanent staff 

members who viewed their position as a career, 

rather than as an extension of the fellowship. This 

has helped create program consistency over time. 

A marked change in recruitment strategies. 

Initially CHC staff recruited individuals 

from different backgrounds into the program. 

VISTA did not require that fellows have a college 

degree. In the early years, program applicants 

included individuals of more diverse ages and 

socioeconomic backgrounds. 

The year that I was a fellow was probably the most 

ethnically diverse year. [Also] Each year we had 

an older person who in both those cases had been 

formerly homeless people. One of the things we 

realized was that the program was not necessarily 

equipped to deal with this group. Their problems 

were unique. The two people who were formerly 

homeless had a lot of social work issues to be dealt 

with and we just didn’t have the capacity. FELLOW, 

CLASS 3, FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 


Hunger Fellow Patience Butler 

gleaning corn in western 

Pennsylvania 

Since the program’s inception, recruiting 

strategies have been modified in several ways. The 

most obvious change in recruiting can be seen in 

the places where the recruitment happens. While 

the focus used to be small liberal arts colleges, 

there has been a shift towards larger state universities 

and Historically Black Colleges. This has 

created a small demographic shift in the pool of 

applicants. 

In addition to changes in direct recruitment 

activities, the use of the Web has enhanced 

recruiting by making information available to a 

wider audience. 

Finally, recruiting has also changed the type of 

fellows that are being sought. In the past, fellows 

that were interested in direct service experience 

were recruited. More recently, the focus has been 

on policy experience: many of the new fellows entering 

the program are seeking an experience that 

will enhance and bolster their policy training, 

having completed direct service work in college. 

An increase in suitability of applicants due 

to increased popularity of program. There 

has been a dramatic increase in the number of 

individuals applying to the program. 9 More and 

more individuals with specific knowledge and 

experience in anti-hunger issues are applying 

to the program, making the selection process 

9 

This information is based on conversations with program staff. 

more competitive. Over the same time period, 

the experiential and socioeconomic diversity of 

program applicants has dramatically declined. 

The program’s tendency to attract white, upper 

middle class individuals is endemic to fellowship 

programs in general. Usually the low pay involved 

with these programs deters individuals from lower 

socioeconomic backgrounds from applying. Now 

that more people are applying to the program, 

CHC staff will have to redouble their efforts to 

ensure that a diverse group of fellows is recruited 

for each class. 

Enhanced ability to build program infrastructure. 

In the early years, Program Directors 

focused on sustaining the program. As funding 

has become more secure, CHC staff has been 

able to concentrate more time and resources on 

building the program infrastructure and laying 

the necessary foundations for established program 

processes. 

When I first started, the Hunger Center was young, 

a nonprofit struggling, there wasn’t very good 

structure in the organization. There was no administrative 

support for the work being done. It was 

a challenging program to run. FORMER PROGRAM 

DIRECTOR 

The increased resources have allowed program 

staff to enhance the quality of the training fellows 

undergo as part of their experience. For both the 

field and policy placements, the trainings have 

become considerably more intense and have 

focused on the specifics of what fellows will be 

doing once they are at their placement agencies. 

These changes have resulted in smoother and 

more successful program implementation. 

Program Benefits 

Innovation Network’s evaluation found six key 

benefits to participating in the National Hunger 

Fellows Program: 

Professional development experience. 

The opportunity to work at the community level 

during the field placement, coupled with the 

chance to gain policy experience in Washington, 


Major Themes 

The exposure to real 

communities across 

the country along with 

the policy experience, 

it’s a great balance. I 

walked about knowing 

that important change 

must and does take 

place on the ground 

and on the Hill and I 

was honored to meet 

. . . people involved in 

both movements. Fellow, 

Class 7 

Hunger Fellows Corina 

Bullock, Rachel Clay, Rajiv 

Magge, and Heather Axford 

Celebrate Commencement 

D.C., provided fellows with a unique exposure to 

anti-hunger issues at both the local and national 

level. Fellows were able to apply what they were 

learning in the field to what was going on in their 

policy placement. 

The exposure to real communities across the 

country along with the policy experience, it’s 

a great balance. I walked about knowing that 

important change must and does take place on 

the ground and on the Hill and I was honored to 

meet . . . people involved in both movements. 

FELLOW, CLASS 7 

Participants gained multi-faceted experience: 

by the program’s end, fellows understand the 

fundamentals of working in an organization, and 

have a solid grasp of the challenge of maintaining 

multiple (sometimes conflicting) interests within 

the hunger community while keeping the overall 

goal of alleviating hunger in mind. Since many 

individuals participating in the fellowship have 

had varying degrees of anti-hunger experience either 

at the field or policy level, the program helps 

to tie in both perspectives, giving individuals a 

broader picture of how to combat hunger in the 

United States. This type of professional development 

experience is not typical of most one-year 

programs, and is enhanced by the quantity 

and caliber of training provided to participants 

throughout the year. 

As a complement to the policy training 

detailed above, fellows are provided with extensive 

field training throughout their fellowship. 

In August, prior to reporting to their field site 

organizations, fellows participate in an elevenday 

field training that focuses on the realities of 

domestic hunger, the emergency food system, and 

the federal programs designed to alleviate hunger 

in the United States. Midway through the field 

site placement, fellows participate in a retreat to 

reflect on their learning so far. In addition, two 

or three times a month during the policy training 

phase, fellows have the opportunity to attend 

Professional Development Days (PDDs). PDDs 

serve as an opportunity for fellows to connect 

with professionals in the Washington, D.C., 

area; hone their leadership skills (as they design 

and implement most PDDs themselves); and 

explore topics related to hunger, such as the U.S. 

Agriculture System, Tax Policy and Class, Race 

and Racism, and International Hunger. 

Increased awareness of anti-hunger and 

related issues. The combination of the field and 

policy experiences provides fellows with an increased 

understanding of anti-hunger issues. Over 

ninety percent of the alumni who participated in 

the survey agreed or strongly agreed that participating 

in the fellowship provided them with an 

understanding of hunger and poverty at the local 

and national level. The direct experience of working 

at the community and national level enabled 

participants to witness first-hand the role of the 

government in addressing hunger-related issues. 

A few comments are listed below: 

I look at the National Hunger Fellows Program as 

giving me a chance to see the bigger picture of the 

role of government and public policy on disadvantaged 

people. FELLOW, CLASS 6 

The combination of fieldwork and policy placement 

gave me perspective on the seriousness of the 

hunger/poverty problem, and the lack of programs 

through the federal government to adequately 

address those problems. FELLOW, CLASS 5 

Direct exposure to communities impacted 

by hunger and poverty. The fellowship experience 

provided a unique opportunity for participants 

to expand their knowledge of hunger and 

poverty and how it can impact a community. By 

working directly with individuals and communi- 


The Fellowship enabled 

me to gain experience 

doing meaningful 

work with excellent 

organizations while 

simultaneously exposing 

me to many leaders 

in the anti-hunger/ 

social justice field and 

challenging me to think 

about how I can address 

inequality in society. 

Fellow, Class 9 

ties living in poverty, Fellows were able to deepen 

their understanding and knowledge of the far 

reaching implications of hunger in the U.S. 

The most important part for me, was [getting] to 

know the people in the community. My friends were 

low-income people that were living in a rural, eastern 

Kentucky community. . . . I certainly learned a 

lot about hunger, communities and what the issues 

were. FELLOW, CLASS 8 

It was so exciting to go into rural communities and 

figure out the infrastructure that exists and figure 

out how to help hungry kids. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

The number of connections made through 

networking opportunities. Respondents indicated 

that a key benefit of the Fellowship Program 

was the professional network established over 

the course of the fellowship. They emphasized 

the uniqueness of the political ties they were able 

to build in the field and in Washington, D.C. In 

addition to meeting individuals who are currently 

in the anti-hunger field, fellows were also able to 

forge strong ties with their fellowship classmates. 

These connections have proven to be lasting. 

Typical survey/interview quotes include: 

You meet so many people and through professional 

development days and you hear about how they got 

where they are . . . The relationships I made during 

those years and the exposure to work on the Hill 

had a lasting impact on me. FELLOW, CLASS 3 

The opportunity to connect and bond 

with other like-minded individuals. The 

Congressional Hunger Center enhanced the 

community of participants through various 

trainings and retreats. The Center staff built in a 

strong ‘fellowship’ component into the program 

through a combination of the Field Training, 

Midfield Retreat, Policy Training, and a number 

of Professional Development Days. With an open 

venue in which to share and discuss program 

experiences, participants were able to learn from 

each other and develop bonds that endure beyond 

the duration of the program. Many program 

alumni described the community aspect of the 

program as being essential. Our data show that 

many former fellows still keep in touch with 

members of their class. Survey and interview comments 

include: 

The fellowship aspect was invaluable to my experience. 

There was networking, sharing a common 

experience, being connected with people from that 

program. Because it is such a unique experience, 

it’s nice to have people who have gone through 

it, who sort of understand where you are coming 

from. FELLOW, CLASS 4 

. . . one of the strongest suits of the program is that 

[fellows] are provided with a network of similar 

folks who are as dedicated and as committed to 

the issue of making the world a better place as they 

are. FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

First-hand leadership experience. The 

Fellowship Program offers participants high levels 

of responsibility in settings that support their 

learning. These projects range from conducting 

assessments of local school breakfast programs 

to researching and producing information for 

distribution among anti-hunger networks. These 

experiences help build the confidence and capacity 

of participants to continue their work even 

after the program is completed. During their 

placements, fellows are able to interact with and 

glean knowledge from a number of leaders in 

the field. The unique experience provided by the 

fellowship is one of the hallmarks of the program. 

Typical testimonials from alumni include: 

As a first job out of college, the professional development 

that the Hunger Center facilitated enabled 

me to grow as a leader and to develop extremely 

useful skills sets. FELLOW, CLASS 8 

The Fellowship enabled me to gain experience doing 

meaningful work with excellent organizations 

while simultaneously exposing me to many leaders 

in the anti-hunger/social justice field and challenging 

me to think about how I can address inequity 

in society. FELLOW, CLASS 9 


Major Themes 

Leadership Development 

Of the alumni who responded to the survey, 

a majority has been involved in some form 

of leadership activities since completing the 

fellowship program. 

The top five activities that program alumni 

have been involved in after completing the 

program were: 

1. Volunteering personal time for a social 

justice cause 

2. Engaging in advocacy activities 

3. Serving as a leader in a social justice 

organization 

4. Lobbying public officials on behalf of a 

social justice cause 

5. Volunteering professional services on behalf 

of a social justice cause/organization 

Table 5: Activities Alumni have Participated in Since 

Completing Fellowship 

Activity 

Percentage 

Volunteered personal time for a social justice cause 88% 

Engaged in other advocacy activities 

(education campaigns, demonstrations, etc.) 

Served as a leader in an organization pursuing social justice 

(as a staff member or as a volunteer) 

70% 

62% 

Lobbied public officials on behalf of a social justice cause 50% 

Volunteered professional services to a social justice 

cause/organization. 

Participated in a conference as a presenter or panelist advocating a 


Served in another leadership role (Advisory Board, 

Board of Trustees, etc.) 

Published or edited an article or book to advance a particular 


47% 

42% 

28% 

26% 

Served on the Board of Directors for a social justice organization 12% 

Categories are not mutually exclusive. Each activity is listed as a percent of 100. 

Impact on the Fight Against Hunger 

The National Hunger Fellows Program is based 

on the premise that coaching a group of individuals 

in both field and policy work puts those 

individuals in a better position to impact the fight 

against hunger. The program’s combination of 

field and policy perspectives leads participants 

to a unique understanding of the problem of 

hunger. The survey and interview questions used 

for this evaluation were designed to get a better 

understanding of how successful the National 

Hunger Fellows Program has been in developing 

leaders. Innovation Network’s analysis reveals the 

following: 

The Program is instrumental in grooming 

future leaders. The fellowship is structured so 

that participants are able to harness their experience 

and knowledge to make a lasting difference 

at both the community and policy level—a 

difference that goes beyond the duration of the 

fellowship. Participants work on hunger-related issues 

in a real-world setting, gaining experience in 

organizational dynamics and development issues, 

while also learning how to solve problems at the 

policy level. 

The program develops . . . leaders with an awareness 

of the problems with hunger and gives them 

real world experience in an organizational setting 

so they can be exposed to office management and 

learn how people interact within an organization 

and how people handle problems on the ground. 

They get to see how hunger affects communities 

in different ways. [The program] allows individuals 

to develop leadership skills and experience. No 

matter what they do throughout the rest of their 

life, they can use a lot of the things that they’ve 

learned in their fellowship. SITE SUPERVISOR 

The program’s structure offers a well-balanced 

opportunity. Fellows not only conduct formal 

policy analysis of anti-hunger programs; they 

work with and learn from the people and communities 

who are affected by policy. The experience 

of building relationships with people who are impacted 

by hunger and poverty in their everyday 


Hunger Fellow Elizabeth 

Whelan and community 

member Rosalva Coronado 

pick up donated kitchen 

micro-enterprise supplies in 

Tucson 

I feel like I could go 

conquer anything. In 

that realm it’s very 

empowering. I really am 

prepared to be a leader 

in the field. I now know 

so much more than 

others in the world. I’m 

in the minority of people 

who have done the work 

hands on and who can 

speak with authority. 

Fellow, Class 9 

lives gives participants a unique perspective when 

they are at their policy placement. One former 

fellow sums up the experience thus: 

I feel like I could go conquer anything. In that 

realm it’s very empowering. I really am prepared to 

be a leader in the field. I now know so much more 

than others in the world. I’m in the minority of 

people who have done the work hands on and who 

can speak with authority. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

Fellows take on leadership roles after 

completing the program. After developing 

leadership skills over the course of the oneyear 

program, many fellows continue to make 

a difference in the anti-hunger or other social 

justice fields. The program is based in part on 

the assumption that after completing the fellowship, 

participants will continue working for social 

justice organizations. Since most organizations 

involved in anti-hunger and other social justice 

issues are nonprofits, we specifically asked alumni 

what sectors they have worked in since completing 

their fellowship. Our survey data indicate 

that the great majority of the alumni (90 percent) 

continue working in the nonprofit/social justice 

field well after the program is over. 

Fifty-six percent of survey respondents 

reported that their current position “greatly” addresses 

anti-hunger or other related social justice 

issues. In addition, eighty-four percent of the 

survey respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed” 

with the statement that the program provided 

them with an understanding of how to alleviate 

hunger and poverty in the United States. In addition, 

over eighty-five percent of the alumni who 

responded to the survey agreed that the program 

fostered their commitment to working for a social 

justice cause. 

After completing the 

Fellowship Program, 

participants continue 

to make a difference in 

the real world: 

When you look at where 

participants have gone 

after the program, I think you’ll see that they 

have taken on fairly significant leadership roles 

in different organizations and I think that’s a 

testament among the people I know. People point 

to the Hunger Fellows Program as the key critical 

experience that put them on the path to where 

they are. SITE SUPERVISOR 

The Fellowship has a marked impact on 

the lives of those who participate. As the 

first job out of college, the program comes at an 

instrumental time in a fellow’s life. Participants in 

the program obtain a type of exposure and experience 

that sharpens their thinking and provides 

them with a real context that prepares them for 

life after the fellowship. According to conversations 

that Innovation Network had with former 

program directors and fellows, the program opens 

up individual opportunities for work, growth, and 

formation that may not have existed prior to the 

Fellowship. This enables fellows to take on more 

responsibility in various leadership roles after the 

completion of the program: 

I think that [the program] allows participants to 

have significant leadership responsibility . . . right 

out of college. Having that experience at a young 

age puts you on a different trajectory in some ways 

because you don’t have to work yourself up to those 

positions of responsibility. Whatever you do after 

the Fellowship, you already come into it with a 

certain level of responsibility. FORMER PROGRAM 

DIRECTOR 

Fellows are able to influence the organizations 

and communities they are working in. 

In addition to making a personal difference in 

the lives of the fellows themselves, the program 

enables fellows to have a tremendous impact 

on the constituencies and communities they 


Major Themes 

Looking back . . . it’s 

really obvious to me 

that the work that [the 

Fellows] have done 

has really significantly 

improved the awareness 

of our advocacy . . . 

People now view us as 

more of a leader on 

hunger issues because 

of the research the 

Fellows have done. Site 

Supervisor 

work in. The work that they do during their field 

placement and later on in their policy placement 

can transform organizations and communities. 

During their placements, fellows play an instrumental 

role in defining, shaping, and carrying 

out projects that impact the community on both 

the local and national level. The following comments 

from site supervisors help to illustrate this 

finding: 

[Fellows] produce reports and information. It’s not 

an academic exercise—they produce things that actually 

get utilized, sent out and widely distributed 

among our anti-hunger network. SITE SUPERVISOR 

[One Fellow] did an analysis on the summer food 

service program here in Milwaukee County, and 

that research has really spurred additional investment 

in the local summer food program. This 

year there’s a significant increase in the number 

of meals served to kids. It all goes back to that 

research. That research has paid its dividend many 

times over already. SITE SUPERVISOR 

Looking back . . . it’s really obvious to me that 

the work that [the Fellows] have done has really 

significantly improved the awareness of our advocacy 

. . . People now view us as more of a leader on 

hunger issues because of the research the Fellows 

have done. SITE SUPERVISOR 

Fellows are indeed making a difference in 

the fight against hunger. Every class of fellows 

in the National Hunger Fellows Program is trained 

in and educated about hunger issues in the 

United States. The program provides fellows with 

multiple perspectives that help them identify 

key issues and gain experience in solving hunger 

at both the local and national level. After the 

program is over, most fellows (fifty-six percent) 10 

either obtain employment with an organization 

involved in social justice and/or pursue a graduate 

degree (fifty-nine percent). 11 The program helps 

to bolster participants’ interests in hunger-related 

issues, and provides them with the tools necessary 

to create change. Considering that the Fellowship 

selects approximately 20 individuals each year 

and has been in existence for 10 years, there are 

over 200 leaders, a majority of whom stay in the 

social justice field, that continue to make a difference 

in the fight against hunger or related social 

justice issues. 

[The National Hunger Fellows Program] has not 

only achieved, but it has far surpassed the goals 

that we set for in training emerging leaders in the 

fight against hunger. The goal was . . . to provide 

exposure, experience and the expertise to committed 

and dedicated folks who are looking for a 

start in this work whether it be against domestic 

or international hunger. From all the evidence of 

being able to talk with . . . alumni, both recent and 

a little bit distant, it’s doing just that. FORMER 

PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

So much of what the program does is develop 

leaders that may have an impact on the future . . . 

No matter what Fellows end up doing the experience 

. . . and knowledge . . . will stay with 

them. FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

Value of Field and Policy Placement 

The field and policy placements are the core 

of the National Hunger Fellowship Program. To 

better understand the strengths and challenges of 

the fellowship, Innovation Network asked alumni 

to provide information regarding their experience 

in both the field and policy placements. 

Field Placement—Most Valuable Aspects 

The survey and interview data included many 

comments describing the most valuable aspects 

of the field placements. Seventy-four percent 

of the alumni who completed the survey indicated 

that the National Hunger Fellows Program 

provided them with an opportunity to gain 

first-hand experience working in local communities. 

12 Over ninety percent of alumni agreed with 

10 

56.6 percent of alumni report that their current position addresses 

anti-hunger or related social justice issues “somewhat” to “a great 

deal.” Refer to Table 14 in Appendix 2 for more details. 

11 


12 



Hunger Fellow Robert 

Campbell and CHC Board 

Co-Chair Congresswoman 

Jo Ann Emerson 

Fellows are indeed 

making a difference in 

the fight against hunger. 

the statement that the program helped provide 

an understanding of hunger and poverty at the 

local level. 13 Analysis of the data reveals three key 

aspects of the program that participants found 

most valuable: 

Experience of being immersed in local 

communities. The field experience provided a 

unique opportunity for fellows to experience the 

hardships faced by the communities they worked 

in. For many fellows, this was an eye opener: it 

gave them the chance to view the world from a 

different perspective. Participants were able to 

work with individuals that were directly impacted 

by hunger. Field assignments took fellows to 

places such as food banks, coalition meetings, 

and soup kitchens. Through these venues, fellows 

were able to see first-hand what it is like to be 

poor and witness the impact of community-level 

programs on the individuals that need them. 

The most valuable aspect of my field placement 

was living and working in a local community. This 

provided me an opportunity to see hunger from a 

local perspective. FELLOW, CLASS 7 

I learned how to become a part of someone else’s 

world for a little while. FELLOW, CLASS 1 

Second, fellows valued the experience of being 

mentored by a good supervisor. Many of 

the fellows felt that they benefited from working 

with a positive role model. Participants usually 

worked closely with their field site supervisor and, 

in many instances, the site supervisor took on a 

mentoring role as he/she exposed fellows to the 

fieldwork: 

My supervisor . . . was a terrific mentor. She really 

allowed me to be creative in my work and took the 

time to help develop my skills. FELLOW, CLASS 7 

Not all participants had such open and communicative 

relationships with their supervisors. 

Occasionally, fellows learned from difficult situations 

that arose due to a challenging relationship 

with their site supervisor, for example: 

13 


The most valuable aspect of my field placement 

was working with unprofessional supervisors. As 

ridiculous as that might sound, it taught me ‘what 

not to do.’ FELLOW, CLASS 9 

Finally, fellows appreciated the opportunity 

to take on a leadership role. Many of the 

fellows indicated that one of the most valuable 

aspects of their field placement was that they were 

given high levels of responsibility. On several 

occasions, fellows were responsible for projects 

that involved intense community work. Initial 

successes in their fieldwork helped build confidence 

and empowered fellows as they moved on 

to take other responsibilities: 

I was given a lot of leeway . . . in my field placement 

to do organizing around a summer feeding 

program. It was daunting at first . . . but once we 

got there and had people in the room together, it 

worked. We really felt good about the awareness 

that was raised. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

The most valuable aspect was having a good 

amount of individual control over projects and 

being placed into a position of leadership. 


Field Placement—Least Valuable Aspects 

Innovation Network also asked alumni what 

the least valuable aspects of their field placement 

were. Answers to this question naturally varied by 

each individual’s experience; however, the following 

themes did surface from the survey: 

The least valuable aspect of the fellows’ field 

experiences stemmed from unfavorable working 

conditions that resulted from lack of work 

plan clarity and strong leadership from the field 

site. While these types of situations were rare, 

they did impact the overall fellowship experience 

for those placed in such scenarios. In instances 

where participants were placed in organizations 

with poor leadership, fellows were able to learn a 

lot about effectively leading an organization: 

The quality of leadership at my field placement 

was very low. I learned a lot about leadership by 

observing how ineffective our Food Bank was. It 


Major Themes 

Celebrating at the Mid-Field 

Retreat, Staff and 10th Class 

Emerson Fellows 

would have been nice to have had the opportunity 

to work with someone who was really an effective 

leader. FELLOW, CLASS 6 

While the staff at the Hunger Center has taken 

many steps to make sure that participants have a 

positive field experience, the distance between all 

the field sites makes it difficult to control what is 

happening at the sites. 

Secondly, a few participants were unsatisfied 

with the type of work they were required 

to do during their field placement. Most of these 

complaints stemmed from unclear job duties. 

In these cases, the work did not reflect the tasks 

outlined in the initial work plans. One of the key 

themes that emerged from Innovation Network’s 

analysis was that there was often a discrepancy 

between what was stated in the field site work 

plan and the actual tasks given to fellows: 

I spent more than half my time preparing meals, 

which was not the intent of the fellowship. My 

field placement viewed my partner and I as free labor, 

rather than valuable employees with meaningful 

things to contribute. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

One former program director acknowledged 

this problem and indicated that it was sometimes 

difficult to coordinate and keep tabs on what was 

going on in all the different field locations. The 

Hunger Center has strived to clarify the type of 

work fellows should be involved in by having 

strict guidelines and requiring all sites to submit 

detailed work plans; however, this did not always 

work. As mentioned earlier, the distance between 

Washington, D.C., and the various field sites drastically 

limits the amount of interaction CHC can 

have with the field sites. In many cases, the field 

sites themselves are nonprofits struggling to stay 

afloat. Typically, fellows were able to handle such 

situations on their own, but on occasion, Center 

staff would have to intervene. 

Issues within the field site organization 

would sometimes take away from the overall 

experience of the fellowship. A few of the fellows 

expressed discontent around the internal politics 

of the organizations they were placed in. In instances 

where field sites had a lot of internal strife, 

it was difficult for fellows to separate themselves 

from the politics going on within the organization 

in order to see the bigger picture. Although at 

the time of the fellowship, fellows were frustrated 

to be caught up in the organizational issues of a 

host site, conversations with alumni reveal that 

these situations helped them get a more realistic 

perspective on the challenges that may arise in 

any work setting. The issues that fellows were dealing 

with at their hosting agency are comparable to 

issues they may face in the real world. 

Finally, the issue of mentoring and support 

received from the Congressional Hunger 

Center in the formative years of the program 

was a problem as referenced by seven percent of 

the respondents. Most of the negative comments 

regarding the level of support provided from 

the Hunger Center were from the earlier classes. 

Initially the Congressional Hunger Center lacked 

the necessary funding to put towards the training 

and professional development of the fellows. As 

funding became more secure, the Hunger Center 

staff was able to make the trainings more focused 

and provide more support to the fellows out in 

the field. Beginning with the ninth class, the 

Hunger Center incorporated a “midfield retreat,” 

providing fellows with an opportunity to come 


[My policy placement 

provided] the 

opportunity to meet and 

watch national policy 

advocates work. I think 

I learned a tremendous 

amount about the 

workings of DC and 

the way in which social 

policy advocates can 

participate. Fellow, 

Class 6 

together midway through their field placement. 

This retreat has been well received by program 

stakeholders. The ability to share experiences 

midcourse through the placement has been of 

tremendous value to participants. The comments 

below illustrate some of the issues that arose in 

the early years of the program, prior to the incorporation 

of the midfield retreat: 

There was a lack of guidance and available resources 

from the Hunger Center. FELLOW, CLASS 2 

There was little contact with the Hunger Center 

during our field placement. We were out there on 

our own. . . . I wonder if CHC could have made 

our experience even better by prodding us on what 

we were learning, asking us questions, challenging 

us, etc. FELLOW, CLASS 1 

The Hunger Center took feedback and applied 

lessons learned from each class to make improvements 

for the next. This resulted in the program 

improving with incoming classes of new fellows. 

Policy Placement—Most Valuable Aspects 

Over sixty percent of the alumni who responded 

to the survey indicated that they benefited 

greatly from working first-hand for a policy 

organization in Washington, D.C. Through these 

experiences fellows were able to increase their 

understanding of how the different pieces of the 

policy network fit together in combating hunger 

and poverty. Below is a summary of what the 

fellows found to be the most valuable aspects of 

their policy placement. 

The most valuable aspect of the policy placement 

was an increased understanding of 

the interactions between various government 

agencies. The policy placement provided 

fellows with an opportunity to see first hand how 

the government works. Fellows gained a more indepth 

view of the legislative process and a greater 

understanding of the relationships between various 

people in the policy world. By seeing the interactions, 

competitions, and overlap within the 

anti-hunger organizations in Washington, D.C., 

fellows were able to develop their own thoughts 

and determine their fit in the overall anti-hunger 

establishment. Considering that the policy 

component was one of the most popular aspects 

of the program in its later years, the opportunity 

to be immersed in the D.C. political climate is one 

of the main draws to the program: 

I gained most value from seeing firsthand how 

the government operates, for better and for worse. 

Grasping the size and scope of the divide between 

the Federal approach to social justice issues and 

the nonprofit approach. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

Secondly, participants reported that they 

valued the increased networking opportunities 

provided by the program. Through the 

policy experience, participants were able to meet 

different players in the political network and get 

a close view of how politics works at the federal 

level. Over the course of the policy placement, 

participants were typically exposed to a number 

of different people in the political arena. In 

addition, the Hunger Center provided weekly 

Professional Development Days, during which 

fellows could meet with professionals involved in 

different aspects of anti-hunger work. This was a 

great resource, giving fellows the benefit of broad 

perspectives on hunger issues from professionals 

in the field. 

[My policy placement provided] the opportunity to 

meet and watch national policy advocates work. 

I think I learned a tremendous amount about the 

workings of DC and the way in which social policy 

advocates can participate. FELLOW, CLASS 6 

Finally, some fellows reported that they most 

valued having the opportunity to practice 

skill sets that contribute to their own professional 

development. For the most part, the 

work that fellows were involved in helped them 

get an in-depth understanding of policy work. 

The type of work that participants were involved 

in included grant making efforts, advocacy, and 

education campaigns. These experiences contributed 

to their knowledge and served as an asset 

in subsequent positions they have held since the 

completing the Program. 


Major Themes 

It’s a phenomenal way 

to get a look at what 

you want to do with 

your life. [Through the 

program] I realized 

that I didn’t have much 

interest at the national 

policy level. I came back 

to the community level. 

The program really had 

an impact on me in 

deciding what I wanted 

to do. Fellow, Class 2 

Policy Placement—Least Valuable Aspects 

In addition to learning about the most valuable 

aspects of their policy placement, Innovation 

Network asked alumni about the least valuable 

characteristics of their policy placement. 

Alumni reported that a major drawback of the 

policy placement was that at times, the content 

of the policy work appeared disconnected 

from the possible impact on anti-hunger 

issues. In a few instances fellows did not feel 

the immediate connection between the work 

they were involved in and its overall impact on 

hunger. Because fellows were at their placement 

organization for only six months, it was not 

always possible for them to see the fruition of 

their work. This was more common during the 

policy placement than in the field placement, 

where fellows were usually working directly in 

local communities and could see results almost 

immediately. The nature of policy work appears, 

at times, to be more removed from the actual 

communities that are being impacted. Fellows 

felt disconnected from the impact of the work 

they were doing. 

My policy placement was excellent—but sometimes 

it felt disconnected from reality; so much paper was 

shuffled, and yet I am not sure how much of an 

impact all of this . . . had. FELLOW, CLASS 6 

It [the policy placement] was research [oriented] 

and didn’t have enough direct and immediate 

policy relevance. FELLOW, CLASS 2 

A few fellows were unhappy with the discrepancy 

between work plans and the actual 

work given to the Fellows. Occasionally 

fellows were faced with the situation where their 

work plan did not accurately reflect the work they 

were doing: 

The work plan that my organization submitted 

did not . . . have the substance the organization 

presented. I felt that I lost an opportunity to do the 

substantive work I had hoped to. FELLOW, CLASS 4 

The discrepancy between work plans and 

the actual work carried out by the fellows is, as 

discussed above, a recurring problem in field 

placements, where distance makes coordination 

difficult. Such discrepancies are a more limited 

problem among policy sites, where distance and 

coordination are less of an issue. Considering 

the struggle many nonprofits face to keep afloat, 

it’s easy to see how host organizations can pull 

fellows into extraneous tasks not specified in 

the fellowship work plan. The Congressional 

Hunger Center is taking action to educate host 

organizations at the start of the program and to 

monitor progress during the placement. In recent 

years, CHC has started providing opportunities 

for policy site supervisors to convene midway 

through the placement with other supervisors 

and CHC staff to troubleshoot and come up with 

alternative solutions to challenging situations. 

Finally, it appears that fellows sometimes 

have unreasonable expectations regarding 

the level of ownership they will have in 

the work completed during their policy 

placement. One of the perceived benefits of 

the fellowship experience is the opportunity to 

self-direct on projects at both the community 

and policy level. In a few instances Fellows felt 

that they were not given an appropriate level of 

responsibility over the work they were doing at 

their policy site. The following comments help to 

illustrate this: 

The project I was working on had little room to be 

creative. FELLOW, CLASS 7 

I experienced a lack of ownership on the project I 

was working on. I think the work plan should give 

over a project or major pieces of it to a Fellow so 

that we don’t end up doing piecemeal work. 


In these instances fellows felt disempowered 

within the context of their policy placement. 

One of the key attributes of this program is that 

it empowers individuals by giving them a fair 

amount of control over projects, coupled with 

appropriate guidance when needed. In the situations 

described above, these participants weren’t 

able to experience the full range of the fellowship. 


Table 6: Fellowship Program’s Influence on Career Choices 

Ways in which National Hunger 

Fellowship Program impacted career 

Program helped participants make educated 

decisions regarding their career paths 

Program introduced participants to key players/ 

organizations in the anti-hunger/poverty field 

Program provided opportunity to gain 

first-hand field experience 

Program provided outlets for participants to stay 

involved in anti-hunger/poverty issues after the 

completion of the Fellowship 

There needs to be a method to better gauge the 

amount of control given to the individual fellows 

to ensure they are reaping the full benefits of the 

program. 

Impact on Career 

Number of 

Respondents 

Response 

Ratio 

98 81% 

92 76% 

90 74% 

60 50% 

Other 18 15% 

Categories are not mutually exclusive. Each row in table is listed as a percent of 100. 

One of the main theories behind the program 

is that by providing young adults with this type 

of intense experience in both policy and fieldwork, 

they will have a better sense of what they 

want and don’t want to pursue in their career. 

Innovation Network’s analysis revealed that the 

Fellowship Program has indeed influenced the 

career choices of many of the fellows. Data supporting 

these findings are described below: 

We found that exposure to multiple approaches 

to solving hunger helps participants 

determine their interests. The field 

and policy experiences provide fellows with different 

perspectives on how to solve the problem of 

hunger. By exposing participants to two differing 

approaches, they are better able to discern what 

type of work they would like to be involved in. 

The comment below helps illustrate this point: 

It’s a phenomenal way to get a look at what you 

want to do with your life. [Through the program] I 

realized that I didn’t have much interest at the national 

policy level. I came back to the community 

level. The program really had an impact on me in 

deciding what I wanted to do. FELLOW, CLASS 2 

We also found that participating in the 

Fellowship Program helps fellows make 

educated decisions about what to do after 

completing the program. Our analysis shows 

that the fellowship has had a profound effect in 

the lives of those who participated. Almost seventy 

percent of those survey respondents who pursued 

a graduate degree after completing the program 

indicated that the Fellowship program influenced 

their decision about what degree to pursue. 14 Table 

6 illustrates ways in which the Fellowship Program 

impacted the career of alumni. 

Alumni describe the Fellowship program as 

being pivotal in determining what career path to 

follow. For many, the combined field and policy 

experience has helped shape their views and 

actions, and foster a lasting commitment to alleviating 

hunger. Approximately 86 percent of the 

alumni who completed our survey agreed with 

the statement that participating in the Fellowship 

Program has provided them with a commitment 

to working for a social justice cause. 15 The comments 

below provide a glimpse of how the fellowship 

program has helped shape the career paths of 

those who participated: 

The fellowship was definitely a pivotal experience 

in my career and sort of the last six or seven years 

since I’ve participated in the program. I can definitely 

say that I probably wouldn’t be in the career 

that I’m in right now had I not participated in this 

fellowship. FELLOW, CLASS 4 

My policy experience shaped my views and actions 

by exposing me to the field of community organizing. 

I have since made a commitment to dedicate 

my efforts to supporting truly grassroots, community-based 

solutions to poverty and other social 

issues. FELLOW, CLASS 7 

14 

This percentage represents only those individuals who have 

pursued graduate school. (N=72) , not all survey respondents 

(N= 122). For complete representation of all statistics, refer to 

Table 5 in Appendix 2. 

15 

Refer to Table 16 in Appendix 2 for more detail. 


Major Themes 

Hunger Fellows Katie 

Bolz and Alison Leff get 

to know Ohio 

The Relatedness of Field and 

Policy Placements 

One of the issues that the Congressional 

Hunger Center has struggled with is whether 

or not to form a more purposeful connection 

between the field and policy placements by 

intentionally relating the subject matter, allowing 

fellows to work on the same issue area in 

both placements. On the one hand, correlating 

the two placements by relevancy of content 

area could enhance the fellows’ knowledge in a 

particular issue area—by the end of the program, 

fellows could have an in-depth understanding of 

a focused subject area (e.g., food stamps or summer 

feeding programs) within the greater field 

of hunger alleviation. On the other hand, part 

of the uniqueness of the fellowship experience is 

its ability to expose participants to a broad array 

of anti-hunger issues in the U.S. Focusing on 

one particular issue for the entire year may limit 

opportunities for understanding different perspectives 

and approaches to solving hunger. 

Historically, it has not been a primary concern 

of the program to relate field and policy placements 

unless fellows request it. Eighty-three 

percent of the survey respondents reported that 

they benefited from the combination of both the 

field and policy experiences, with no deliberate 

subject-matter connection between the two. 

During the in-depth interviews, Innovation 

Network probed further by asking alumni, former 

program directors, and site supervisors if they 

thought a greater emphasis on subject-matter 

connection would create added program benefits. 

The majority of the individuals interviewed indicated 

that they prefer no deliberate connection 

to be made between the two placements, unless 

specifically requested by the fellow. The general 

consensus among interviewees was that broadness 

of perspective is one of the program’s primary 

benefits. With the program’s current structure, 

fellows are given a chance to work on a variety 

of different issues. By relating the subject matter 

of the two placements, fellows may miss out on 

a key experience. Participants also felt that by 

specializing on one topic area for the entire year, 

they may end up with a very narrow perspective 

on hunger issues. The following comments help 

illustrate this finding: 

I think the idea behind the program is to give 

people as much experience as possible and to 

give them some exposure to a variety of issues. It 

wouldn’t be beneficial for the fellows themselves to 

work on a similar program for 12 months straight. 

At some point they would lose a lot of that energy 

and momentum that they have when they are here 

for six months at the host site. SITE SUPERVISOR 

I appreciated the diversity of the program. I think 

it’s important to keep it up to the hunger fellows 

and what their interests are. It would be a loss if 

all the sites focused on only one issue for both the 

field and policy placement. They might miss out on 

some experience. I found it beneficial having . . . 

two very different experiences. FELLOW, CLASS 4 

AND FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 


Recommendations 

Innovation Network asked alumni what they 

would change about the Hunger Fellows 

Program, given its current structure. The information 

collected via survey and through the 

in-depth interviews reveals the following suggestions 

to help improve the Fellowship Program: 

Improve the screening process used to connect 

host agencies with participating fellows. 

Many of the negative experiences faced by program 

participants occurred as a result of conflicts 

within the placement organizations. A lot of these 

conflicts stem from discrepancies within the work 

plan submitted by the host site and the actual 

work that the fellows were expected to do. Part of 

the solution may be to temper the expectations of 

fellows so they have a more realistic view of what 

to expect once they arrive at their host organization. 

It may also help if fellows are given tips on 

how to react in various realistic scenarios that 

could occur at their host site. 

In addition to setting participant expectations 

to a more realistic level, steps need to be taken to 

improve the overall screening process. Although 

this process has improved greatly over the years, 

there are still a few kinks in the system. Some of 

the suggestions to improve this process include: 

Revamp the policy placement process to make it 

more transparent, predictable, and fair for fellows 

and policy sites. Also do a better job of screening 

field and policy sites, and establish clearer and 

stronger links with those groups and their staff to 

ensure all Fellows have challenging and productive 

experiences. FELLOW, CLASS 9 

One thing that needs to be improved on is the 

quality and consistency of the field sites. CHC has 

been taking measures to improve in the past couple 

of years. In my year there were a few field sites that 

didn’t really have their acts together. They didn’t 

have adequate housing for the fellows. FELLOW, 

CLASS 8 

Educate fellows so they are able to form 

realistic expectations of the work they will 

be performing at their host sites. As mentioned 

above, some recurring problems stem from 

discrepancies between work plans and the actual 

work that fellows engage in. The Congressional 

Hunger Center needs to find a way to accurately 

communicate the goals of the program and help 

set realistic expectations so that fellows understand 

the differences in experience between the 

field and policy experience. As part of this education, 

fellows should be informed how to take a 

pro-active stance in shaping their own fellowship 

experience. 

Allow fellows more input into decisions 

regarding their field placements. A few alumni 

expressed interest in having more input in deciding 

which field site to be placed in. The current 

structure of the program does not allow participants 

much control over where they are going for 

their field placement. Although fellows are asked 

to fill out a form indicating their preferences, it 

is not always feasible for the Hunger Center to 

match fellows with field sites according to preference. 

In part, this is due to the quick turnaround 

time between the selection of the fellows and the 

start of the field placement. A few of the alumni 

interviewed indicated that they did not mind the 

lack of choice of field placement, because they 

ended up having a good experience. Typical comments 

of those who wanted more input in the 

process are reflected below: 

. . . there’s almost no control that the fellows have 

about where they end up in the field placement, 

or the type of issues they will work on. For the 

policy placement you get a whole lot of say in 

what’s going on. Typically it works pretty well. 

FELLOW CLASS 8 

I like the structure that’s in place right now. 

Going into your policy you get some choice as to 

where to go. Also, it would be nice if they could 

build in some leeway in choosing a field site. 




Strengthen the Hunger Fellows alumni network. 

Several alumni indicated that there needs 

to be more frequent communication among 

fellows in and between different classes. Some 

suggestions for strengthening the network of 

alumni were: 

● Developing a mentoring system. A few alumni 

indicated interest in being available to mentor 

more recent classes of fellows. These individuals 

thought there would be value in capitalizing 

on the alumni network by providing 

a system where Fellows could freely contact 

alumni for career advice. 

● Distributing an alumni directory. A number of 

alumni, especially from the earlier classes, 

indicated that they didn’t know where many 

of their classmates were or what they were involved 

in. One suggestion was for the Hunger 

Center to request that alumni submit description 

of the community where they work and 

the kind of work they do, along with contact 

information. This information could then be 

consolidated and distributed among all program 

alumni. This material could be used for 

networking and peer-advisory purposes. It was 

suggested that this type of list be distributed 

once every two or three years. 

● Create opportunities for alumni to be involved in 

volunteer work. Many alumni indicated that 

they are still passionate about the anti-hunger 

cause, even if their current work does not 

address it directly. These individuals indicated 

that they would like to know more about 

volunteer opportunities as a way to stay connected 

with the field as well as other alumni. 

● Strategically utilize alumni to raise money to help 

support the program. Now that the program 

has been in existence for ten years, there are 

over 200 alumni affiliated with the program. It 

was suggested that the Congressional Hunger 

Center develop more intentional mechanisms 

through which alumni could donate time or 

money. 

● Develop venues for older alumni to connect with 

more recent Fellows. A few survey respondents 

indicated that while they have connections 

within their own class of Fellows, and usually 

with the class immediately before and after 

their own, these connections rarely transcended 

further. Both alumni from earlier classes as 

well as current Fellows indicated an interest in 

further networking opportunities with more 

distant classes of Fellows. 

The connections that I have with other Fellows 

doesn’t really transcend to other classes. We have 

more connection with the class before and after us. 

There was a space made for interaction with those 

groups. The weakness in the alumni connections 

is to go beyond that. It would be helpful to have 

access to a list of alumni, where they are and what 

they are doing. FELLOW, CLASS 5 

We asked alumni to rate the level of support 

they have received from the Congressional 

Hunger Center in helping to maintain their 

alumni network. Forty-six percent of alumni indicated 

that they were receiving adequate support, 

while twenty-two percent reported that they were 

receiving plenty of support. 16 

It should be noted that most of the alumni 

who indicated that they did not receive enough 

support from the Hunger Center in maintaining 

their alumni network were participants of the 

program during its earlier years. 

Most dissatisfaction with the level of support 

received from CHC occurred for those who participated 

in the first two classes of the program. 

Respondents from Classes 7–9 reported the highest 

levels of satisfaction. 17 

16 

Refer to Table 22 in Appendix 2 for more detail. 

17 

Refer to Table 25 of Appendix 2. 


Table 7: Reliance on Peer Network by Class 

Hardly Ever 

Once a Year 

Several x Yr/ 

At least 1x mo. 

Class Number % Number % Number % Number % 

1 0 0% 2 66% 1 33% 3 100% 

2 3 37% 3 37% 2 25% 8 100% 

3 6 60% 2 20% 2 20% 10 100% 

4 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% 5 100% 

5 6 60% 1 10% 3 30% 10 100% 

6 0 0% 4 33% 8 66% 12 100% 

7 5 5% 5 26% 9 47% 19 100% 

8 1 5% 3 16% 14 77% 18 100% 

9 0 0% 2 14% 14 87% 16 100% 

Total 21 20% 23 22% 57 56% 101 100% 

* Percentages have been rounded. 

Total 

Innovation Network also asked alumni how 

often they rely on their network of peers from 

the program for resources and information. 

Forty-two percent indicated that they refer to 

their network at least several times a year. 18 Table 

7 illustrates that members of the later classes are 

more likely to rely on their network of peers. 

The loosest alumni ties, with a high percentage 

of respondents who “hardly ever” rely on their 

peer network, occur in Classes 2, 3, and 5. The 

closeness of networking ties tends to rise with the 

more recent classes. 

Increase program length. A few people have 

suggested increasing the length of the program by 

up to a year. Many people feel that Fellows and 

host sites will both benefit from a longer program. 

However, respondents are sensitive to the fact 

that expanding the duration of the program may 

deter people from applying. A few recommendations 

for program expansion are listed below: 

A longer placement would probably be ideal, 

but a two-year program is probably not realistic. 


18 


Extend the program to a two-year experience, 

one year in the field and one year in DC. When 

one class of fellows moves from the field to the 

policy placement, a new class can begin their field 

experience. FELLOW, CLASS 4 

For me, I didn’t feel like the experience was long 

enough. A lot of people are attracted to the program 

because it’s a one-year experience between college 

and something else. To have a really intense 

experience, I’ve thought about a 2-year program. 

However, that may reduce the applicant pool. 

FELLOW, CLASS 4 AND FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

CHC staff has considered the possibility of 

increasing the length of the program, but has not 

done so for two primary reasons. Increasing the 

length of the program could not likely be done 

without drastically reducing the size of the class 

in order to accommodate budgetary changes 

needed to run two overlapping classes concurrently. 

Furthermore, the staff fear that many 

applicants to the program would be lost if the 

program length was increased to two years, as a 

sizeable number of applicants report that they are 

interested in only a one-year program. 



Enhance recruitment strategies to ensure 

more diversity with in each class. The diversity 

of the program has shifted since its start in 1993. 

Early on, there was a more diverse vision for the 

program. Each class of fellows was diverse, with 

individuals from various socioeconomic strata, 

age groups, educational backgrounds, etc. VISTA, 

the program’s main source of funding in the 

early years, did not require participants to have 

a college degree. As the program shifted funding 

sources, there was a parallel shift occurring in the 

pool of applicants. One former program director 

sums it up: 

During my time as program director . . . there was 

a big question about [if] we should move towards 

just recruiting recent [college] graduates. Initially, 

in order to be a Hunger Fellow, applicants had to 

meet the VISTA recruitment requirements. As we 

were switching from VISTA to more independent 

funding, we were looking at who our population of 

fellows should be. The application pool has gotten 

more competitive . . . and has changed dramatically 

over the years. FORMER PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

As mentioned earlier in this report, as the program 

increased in popularity, the selection process 

became more competitive, and the diversity of 

the applicant pool began to shrink. As the pool 

of applicants got more competitive, it became 

harder to ensure diversity within each class. As 

the program now stands, it is mostly made up of 

white, upper middle class females with previous 

leadership experience and a strong interest in 

anti-hunger policy. 

In my class we had 18 females, four males, and a 

handful of minorities. I know they are taking great 

strides to reach out to historical black colleges. 

They are being more proactive about trying to reach 

out to minorities. One thing that’s structural about 

nonprofits is that there’s a big gender gap. White 

females dominate this industry. FELLOW, CLASS 8 

One of the main recommendations by alumni 

of the program along with current fellows is to 

employ strategies to increase the diversity of each 

incoming class. Previously, with limited funding, 

Welcome to DC! Emerson Fellows, 11th Class 

the Congressional Hunger Center staff could focus 

mainly on recruiting from private, liberal arts colleges 

that hold their own recruiting events in the 

D.C. area. Students in these schools were easier 

to reach with limited funding. Now, CHC staff is 

using different recruiting tactics to draw in a more 

diverse applicant pool. 

While the Congressional Hunger Center 

is experimenting with methods to expand its 

applicant pool, they may have to widen their 

tactics even further. For example, CHC has shifted 

its recruiting emphasis from small, liberal arts 

colleges to public and Historically Black Colleges. 

The underlying assumption in focusing on 

Historically Black Colleges is that they will be 

able to target a more diverse group of qualified 

individuals to apply for the program. However, 

since the ending of segregation in the 1960’s, students 

of color have equal opportunities to attend 

colleges of their choice. The pool of students at 

Historically Black Colleges has gradually changed 

over the past 40 years. Public colleges, intentionally 

diversifying their student body, have been 

successfully recruiting top-notch students who 

otherwise would have attended Historically Black 

Colleges. The Congressional Hunger Center 

may need to rethink its strategy on how to draw 

applicants from minority populations. 

Increase Board and Congressional 

involvement. After interviewing program 

alumni, Innovation Network also interviewed 


Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson, the Co-chair 

of CHC’s Board of Directors. She emphasized 

the importance of Board members involvement 

in the activities of the fellows. She felt that the 

work being done by program participants could 

inspire Board participation and lead to a stronger 

commitment to the program. Congresswoman 

Emerson recommended inviting Board members 

to the annual luncheons where fellows convene 

to share their field and policy experiences. 

We have never actually had Board members attend 

meetings with fellows. We need to do that. They 

would be inspired. Once a year we have a lunch 

with the domestic and international hunger fellows. 

We go around the table and everyone talks 

about what they have been doing and plan on doing. 

I think that if board members actually listened 

to this, it would help them be more involved. 

CONGRESSWOMAN JO ANN EMERSON 

Congresswoman Emerson also suggested 

getting more members of Congress involved in 

the program. She feels that hunger is an issue that 

many Representatives are passionate about, but 

are limited because of time. 

I think that if more of my colleagues got involved 

with the individual fellows, it would expand our 

pool here. The more members of Congress we have 

that are passionate and interested in what the program 

does, then the more ability we have to help 

solve the problem. It’s not changing the program, 

it’s growing it a little bit more. . . . We need to find 

a way to pull more of my colleagues in. 

CONGRESSWOMAN JO ANN EMERSON 

The Congressional Hunger Center is hopeful 

that the new House and Senate Hunger Caucuses 

(established 2004–2005) will provide another way 

that CHC can engage Hill Staff on the issue of 

hunger, and connect those staff and members of 

Congress with fellows. 

Hunger Fellow 

LaFleur Stephens 


Conclusions 

The Congressional Hunger Center has done 

a remarkable job in shaping and solidifying 

their National Hunger Fellows Program over the 

past ten years. This evaluation has led to important 

insights into the effectiveness and impact of 

the program, and has revealed opportunities for 

strengthening the fellowship. Overall, the data 

show that the National Hunger Fellows Program is 

a successful leadership development program that 

meets the expectations of participants, alumni, 

host agencies and others with vested interests. 

Innovation Network’s analysis reveals the 

following insights about the program: 

The Program has improved over the years. 

In its earlier years, there was more uncertainty 

regarding program sustainability. As the program 

shifted its funding from VISTA to other sources, 

program staff has been able to focus more on 

improving the overall fellowship experience. 

The host agencies have been impressed 

with the caliber and readiness of the Fellows 

they receive. The Congressional Hunger Center 

does a good job in training and preparing the 

fellows prior to their field and policy placements. 

Program participants are fully informed on relevant 

issues and ready to start working as soon as 

they reach their host site. 

The program has an impact on career 

decisions made by participants. Many alumni 

indicated that going through the fellowship 

experience influenced their career choices. The 

fellowship program provides a unique glimpse 

into both field and policy work, allowing participants 

to get a better feel for the type of work they 

are interested in. 

The fellowship program has been vital 

in developing a professional network for 

participants. Not only do fellows have access 

to their community of peers, but also the fellow- 

ship program introduces participants to a wide 

network of individuals in the anti-hunger field. 

In addition, during the Professional Development 

Days, fellows are exposed to even more individuals 

who are involved in different aspects of 

anti-hunger work. 

Alumni of the program continue to stay 

involved in anti-hunger/social justice work. 

The evaluation data reveal that a majority of those 

who have gone through this program are still 

involved in anti-hunger or related social justice 

work—either through their jobs or volunteer work. 

The program has succeeded in developing 

leaders in the field. 

Analysis of survey and inter- 

view data reveals that the fellowship experience 

has been pivotal to the professional development 

of participants. The program provides individuals 

with a unique knowledge of anti-hunger issues 

both at the community and national level. This 

combination of experiences puts fellows in a 

position to speak with authority and take on 

additional leadership roles. 

In addition to demonstrating the successes of 

the program, Innovation Network’s analysis also 

revealed the following areas as opportunities for 

improvement. 


. . . the evaluation data 

clearly illustrate that the 

National Hunger Fellows 

Program has evolved 

into a cutting edge 

leadership program 

that plays a key role 

in developing young 

leaders to spearhead 

the fight against hunger 

and poverty in the 

United States. 

Diversity. Although staff at the Congressional 

Hunger Center have been using different techniques 

to attract a more diverse stream of applicants 

to the program (people of color, males, 

and individuals from socioeconomic backgrounds 

other than the upper middle class), additional 

work in this area is needed. The nature of the 

program attracts mostly white, upper middle class 

females. Alumni of the program feel that expanding 

the diversity of each incoming class is crucial 

to the overall fellowship experience. 

Work plans. A number of alumni indicated 

that host sites need to be held more accountable 

to the work plans they submit to the Hunger 

Center. A handful of alumni and current fellows 

indicated that their experience would have been 

better had their host site abided by the original 

work plans, or if the work plans gave fellows more 

ownership over the work they were involved in. 

This is a challenging issue for two main reasons: 

(1) Nonprofits are sometimes understaffed, and 

therefore rely on fellows for more day-to-day administrative 

tasks than preferred by CHC program 

staff and fellows; and (2) it is difficult for CHC to 

screen and monitor the field sites, because they 

are located all over the United States. 

Alumni Network. Survey and interview data 

reveal that participants are in favor of developing 

a stronger alumni network. Participants from the 

earlier classes feel disconnected from their classmates. 

Others indicated that although they feel 

connected with their own class and the classes 

immediately before and after their own, there is 

not much contact with members of other classes. 

Ongoing Evaluation and Monitoring. 

The Congressional Hunger Center has incorporated 

evaluation mechanisms into the everyday 

structure of its National Hunger Fellows Program. 

Some of these mechanisms include fellow selfevaluations, 

supervisor evaluations of the fellows, 

fellow evaluations of their field and policy sites, 

and fellow evaluations of the program. This has 

enabled the Hunger Center to stay informed and 

continue to make modifications to the program. 

As the Congressional Hunger Center moves the 

Fellowship Program into its second decade of 

operation, Innovation Network strongly recommends 

that CHC continue to use program evaluation 

as a tool to guide and improve the program. 

In conclusion, the evaluation data clearly 

illustrate that the National Hunger Fellows 

Program has evolved into a cutting edge leadership 

program that plays a key role in developing 

young leaders to spearhead the fight against 

hunger and poverty in the United States. 


Appendix 1: Data Collection Instruments 

1-A: Innovation Network Surveys 

Current Fellows Survey 

E-mail Text: Innovation Network has been contracted 

by the Congressional Hunger Center to help evaluate the 

impact of the National Hunger Fellows Program on those 

individuals who have participated in this program. With 

the upcoming 10-year anniversary of the program, the 

folks at the Congressional Hunger Center thought this 

would be a good time to officially explore the strengths and 

challenges of the program. As current participants of this 

program, we feel that your responses to these questions will 

add tremendous value to this evaluation. Please take a few 

minutes to complete this survey. We ask that you respond 

honestly and openly. The information that you provide 

will be aggregated with the responses from other Hunger 

Fellows and your confidentiality will be maintained. Please 

feel free to contact me, Veena Keswani @ 202–728–0727 

ext. 107, if you have any questions. 

Welcome! Thank you for taking the time to fill out 

this survey. Your responses to this survey will provide the 

Congressional Hunger Fellows with an opportunity to 

hear your thoughts about potential program improvements 

and help them continue to share the program’s successes 

with potential Hunger Fellows, site host organizations, 

and funders. This survey should take approximately 15 

minutes to complete. Thank You! 

Background Information 

1. Are you currently participating in the National 

Hunger Fellows Program 

= Yes = No 

2. How did you hear about the National Hunger 

Fellows Program (check all that apply) 

= On-campus recruiter 

= College professor 

= Promotional literature 

= Job fair 

= Friend 

= Alumni of the program 

= Career web page (i.e. Idealist.org) 

= Other _______ 

3. What do you plan on doing immediately after you 

complete your fellowship 

= Attend graduate school 

= Obtain employment 

= Attend graduate school and seek employment 

= Other ________ 

[If they answer BOTH—ask both sets of questions below] 

[If Graduate School, then] 

4. What degree do you think you’ll pursue 

= JD 

= MD 

= MPP/MPA 

= MSW 

= MPH 

= Other (please specify) _______ 

[If yes to obtain employment, then] 

5. What sector do you think you will work in 

= Private sector 

= Nonprofit sector 

= Public sector 

[If yes to obtain employment] 

6. What industry do you think you would like to 

work in after you complete your fellowship 

= Advocacy = Foundation/Grant Making 

= Arts/Culture = Government 

= Consulting = Health Services 

= Information = International 

Technology Development/Relief 

= Education = Legal Services 

= Social Services = Public Relations 

= Other (please specify) ___________ 

7. Do you think that you will continue to be 

involved in anti-hunger/poverty issues after you 

complete the program 

= Yes = No = Not sure 

Please explain: 

[If yes to above question] 

8. How do you think you will be involved in antihunger/poverty 

issues after the program is over 

= As a volunteer 

= As a staff member 

= Other (please specify) ____________ 

[If no or undecided to 2 questions above] 

9. Do you think you will become involved in other 

social justice issues 

= Yes = No = Not sure 

Please explain: 



10. Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree 

with the following statements. The National 

Hunger Fellows Program is providing me with . . . 

= Direct knowledge, experience and skills that 

will enable me to find employment after the 

program is over 

= Access to a broader professional network 

= An understanding of how organizations work 

= Guidance to make more informed career choices 

= An understanding of hunger and poverty at the 

local level 

= An understanding of hunger and poverty at the 

national level 

= An understanding of how to alleviate hunger 

and poverty in the U.S. 

= A commitment to working for a social cause 

= Awareness of specific hunger related issues 

11. What was the most valuable aspect of your field 

placement 

12. What was the least valuable aspect of your field 

placement 

13. The Congressional Hunger Center feels that the 

success of their fellowship program hinges on 

the uniqueness of the combined field and policy 

experiences, and the balance between these two 

six-month placements. By this time, you should 

have already received your policy placement. To 

what extent do you feel you will benefit from the 

combination of these experiences 

= A great deal 

= Somewhat 

= Not much 

= Not at all 

14. From your perspective, what do you believe to be 

the most valuable benefit of participating in the 


15. If there was one thing you could change about the 

program, what would it be 

16. Please indicate which of the following activities 

you think you will be involved in after your fellowship 

is complete. (check all that apply) 

= Participating in the alumni listserv 

= Training and professional development of future 

Hunger Fellows 

= Recruiting and/or selecting future Hunger 

Fellows 

= Serving as a field or policy site supervisor for 

future Hunger Fellows 

= Collaborating professionally with the 


= Contributing funding to the Congressional 

Hunger Center 

= Attending events or parties sponsored by the 


= Reading and/or contributing to the CHC 

Newsletter or NHF Alumni Newsletter 

= Other (please specify) ____________ 

17. How connected do you feel with your community 

of peers in the fellowship program 

= Very connected 

= Somewhat connected 

= Not very connected 

= Not connected at all 

18. Do you think that you will stay in touch with 

members of your fellowship program after the 

completion of this program 

= Definitely yes 

= Probably yes 

= Probably no 

= Definitely no 

19. In the space below, please let us know if you have 

any additional comments or suggestions about the 

National Hunger Fellows Program. 

THANK YOU! 




Alumni Survey 

E-mail Text: Innovation Network has been contracted 

by the Congressional Hunger Center to help evaluate the 

impact of the National Hunger Fellowship Program on 

those individuals who have participated in the program. 

With the upcoming 10-year anniversary of the program, 

the folks at the Congressional Hunger Center thought this 

would be a good time to officially explore the strengths 

and challenges of the program. Please take a few minutes 

to complete this survey. We ask that you respond honestly 

and openly. The information you provide will be aggregated 

with the responses from other Hunger Fellow Alumni 

and your confidentiality will be maintained. Please feel 

free to contact me, Veena Keswani @ 202–728–0727 ext. 

107 if you have any questions. 

[included in first page of survey] Welcome! We appreciate 

your time and willingness to participate in this survey. 

Your responses to this survey will provide the Congressional 

Hunger Center with an opportunity to hear your thoughts 

about potential program improvements and help them 

continue to share the program’s successes with potential 

Hunger Fellows, site host organizations, and funders. This 

survey should take approximately 20 minutes to complete. 

Thank You! 

Background Information 

We are going to begin by asking you a few questions about 

what you’ve accomplished since completing the National 

Hunger Fellows Program. 

1. What year did you participate in the Congressional 

Hunger Center’s National Hunger Fellows 

Program 

= Class 1 (Year 94–95) = Class 6 (Year 99–00) 




= Class 5 (Year 98–99) 

2. Since graduating from the National Hunger 

Fellows Program, have you pursued a graduate 

degree 

= Yes = No 

3. When did you pursue your graduate degree 

[if answered yes to #2] 

= Within one year of completing my fellowship 

= I am currently enrolled in a graduate program 

= Other (please specify): __________________ 

4. What degree did you pursue (or are you pursuing) 

in graduate school [if answered yes to #2] 

= JD 

= MD 

= MPP/MPA 

= MSW 

= MPH 

= Other (please specify): _______________ 

5. Did participating in the National Hunger Fellows 

Program influence your decision to pursue this 

degree [if answered yes to #2] 

= Yes = No 

Please explain: ________________________________ 

6. Since graduating from the National Hunger 

Fellows Program, have you worked in the nonprofit 

or public sector 

= Yes, I’ve worked in the nonprofit sector 

= Yes, I’ve worked in the public sector 

= Yes, I’ve worked in both sectors 

= No, I have not worked in either sector 

7. Please indicate the activities you have participated 

in since graduating from the National Hunger 

Fellows Program. (check all that apply) 

= Served on the Board of Directors for a social 

justice organization 

= Served in another leadership role (i.e. Advisory 

Board, Board of Trustees, etc.) 

= Published or edited an article or book to advance 

a particular social justice cause 

= Participated in a conference as a presenter or 

panelist advocating a social justice cause 

= Volunteered personal time for a social justice 

cause 

= Volunteered professional services to a social 

justice cause/organization 

= Served as a leader in an organization pursuing 

social justice (as a staff member or a volunteer) 

= Lobbied public officials on behalf of a social 

justice cause 

= Engaged in other advocacy activities (i.e. education 

campaigns, demonstrations, etc.) 

= Other (please specify):_______________________ 

Now we would like to ask you a few questions about the 

activities you pursued immediately after completing your 

fellowship program. 


8. What did you do within the first year of completing 

the National Hunger Fellows Program 

= Attended graduate school 

= Obtained employment 

= Both 

= Other (please specify): _______________________ 

9. In what sector were you employed within the first 

year of completing the National Hunger Fellows 

Program [ask if they answered ‘obtained employment’ 

or ‘both’ in #5] 

= Private sector 

= Nonprofit sector 

= Public sector 

10. Please select an industry that best describes your 

line of work within the first year of completing the 

program. [ask if they answered ‘obtained employment’ 

or ‘both’ in #5] 

= Advocacy = Health Services 

= Arts/Culture = Information Technology 

= Consulting = International 

= Education Development/Relief 

= Foundation/ = Legal Services 

Grant Making = Public Relations 

= Government = Social Services 

= Other (please specify): ________________ 

11. To what extent did this position address anti-hunger 

or other related social justice issues [ask if they 

answered ‘obtained employment’ or ‘both’ in #5] 


= Somewhat 

= Not much 

= Not at all 

= Don’t know 

The next couple of questions will focus on your current 

professional status. 

12. What is your CURRENT employment status 

(check all that apply) 

= Working full-time 

= Working part-time 

= Attending graduate school 

= Not currently employed 

= Other (please specify): _______________ 

13. In what sector are you CURRENTYLY employed 

[if selected ‘working full-time’ or ‘part-time’ in #6] 

= Private Sector 

= Nonprofit Sector 

= Public Sector 

14. Please select an industry that best describes your 

CURRENT line of work.) [if selected ‘working fulltime’ 

or ‘part-time’ in #6] 

= Advocacy = Health Services 

= Arts/Culture = Information Technology 

= Consulting = International 

= Education Development/Relief 

= Foundation/ = Legal Services 

Grant Making = Public Relations 

= Government = Social Services 

= Other (please specify): ________________ 

15. To what extent does the position you CURRENTLY 

hold address anti-hunger or other related social 

justice issues [if selected ‘working full-time’ or ‘parttime’ 

in #6] 


= Somewhat 

= Not much 

= Not at all 



Now we would like to ask you a couple of questions about 

some of the benefits of participating in this program. 

16. From your perspective, what was the most important 

benefit (professionally and personally) 

of participating in the National Hunger Fellows 

Program 

17. In what ways has your participation in the 

National Hunger Fellows Program impacted your 

career (check all that apply) 

= The program provided an opportunity to gain 

first-hand field experience 

= The program introduced me to key players/organizations 

in the anti-hunger/poverty field 

= The program provided outlets for me to stay 

involved in anti-hunger/poverty issues after the 

completion of the fellowship 




Alumni Survey 

Access to a broader professional 

network 

An understanding of how 

organizations work 

An understanding of hunger 

& poverty at the local 

level 

An understanding of 

hunger & poverty at the 

national level 


to alleviate hunger & poverty 

in the U.S. 

A commitment to working 

for a social justice cause 

Awareness of specific hunger 

related issues 

Direct knowledge, experience 

and skills that helped 

me find employment after 

the program was over 

= The program helped me make educated decisions 

regarding my career path 

= Other (please explain):______________________ 

18. Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree 

with the following statements: Participating 

in the National Hunger Fellows Program provided 

me with . . . 

Strongly 

disagree 

Disagree 

No 

opinion 

Agree 

Strongly 

agree 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

= = = = = 

Program Design 

We are concluding this survey with a few questions about 

the overall design and structure of the program. Your 

answers to these questions will help the Congressional 

Hunger Center fine-tune the program for future Fellows. 

19. If there was one thing you could change about the 

structure of the National Hunger Fellows Program, 

what would it be 

20. What was the most valuable aspect of your field 

placement How did this experience influence 

your views or actions since the fellowship 

21. What was the least valuable aspect of your field 

placement 

22. What was the most valuable aspect of your policy 

placement How did this experience shape your 

views or actions since the fellowship 

23. What was the least valuable aspect of your policy 

placement 

24. Do you feel that the experience and knowledge 

gained from your field placement contributed to 

your experience and learning during your policy 

placement 

= Yes = No 

25. The Congressional Hunger Center feels that the 

success of their fellowship program hinges on 

the uniqueness of the combined field and policy 

experiences, and the balance between these two 

six month placements. To what extent do you 

feel you benefited from the combination of these 

experiences 


= Somewhat 

= Not much 

= Not at all 


Please use the space below to include any comments 

you may have regarding the above question. 


Participated in the alumni 

listserv 

Participated in training & 

professional development of 


Participated in the recruitment 

and/or selection of 

Fellows 

Participated as a field or 

policy site supervisor 

Participated as a Program 

Advisory Board Member 

Donated funds to the 

Congressional Hunger 

Center 

Provided in-kind services to 

the Congressional Hunger 

Center 

26. Do you have any suggestions on how to better 

integrate the field and policy placements within 

the program Please explain. 

27. Please indicate how often you’ve engaged in the 

following activities. 

Never Occasionally Often N/A 

= = = = 

= = = = 

= = = = 

= = = = 

= = = = 

= = = = 

= = = = 

28. How would you rate the level of support that 

you’ve received from the Congressional Hunger 

Center in helping to maintain your alumni network 

= Not enough support 

= Adequate support 

= Plenty of support 

29. As a result of participating in the National Hunger 

Fellows Program, did you develop a network of 

peer contacts 

= Yes = No 

30. How often do you rely on that network for resources 

and information [if answered yes to #20] 

= Hardly ever 

= About once a year 

= Several times a year 

= At least once a month 

31. How could the Congressional Hunger Center 

improve access to the alumni network Please 

explain. 

32. Please share any additional comments you may 

have about the National Hunger Fellows Program. 

Thank You! 

Attended an event or 

party sponsored by the 

Congressional Hunger 

Center 

= = = = 



1-B: Innovation Network Interview Protocols: 

Alumni 

Participating Class: _____ 

Question 1: Can you tell me about your experience 

with the Hunger Fellows Program What stands 

out for you 

Question 2: What is your overall perception of the 

National Hunger Fellows Program If there were 

one thing you could change about the program, 

what would it be In your opinion, is there any 

way that the structure of the program could be 

improved 

Question 3: What skills did you acquire from the 

program What did you learn What were the 

main benefits of the program 

Question 4: What types of anti-hunger/social justice 

activities have you been involved in since 

completing the program Please describe your 

involvement. 

[If appropriate, ask] 

Question 5: What are some of your accomplishments 

in the anti-hunger/social justice field [Example— 

have you published articles, presented at conferences, 

served as a leader in an organization, volunteered, etc.] 

Question 6: What did you do immediately after the 

program was over Did it relate to anti-hunger or 

other social justice issues 

Question 7: What type of work are you currently 

involved in Does it relate to anti-hunger or other 

social justice issues What prompted you to pursue 

this line of work 

Question 8: Have your volunteered for an anti-hunger 

or other social justice cause Please tell me about 

the type of volunteer work you were involved in. 

The Congressional Hunger Center feels that the 

success of their fellowship program hinges on the 

uniqueness of the combined field and policy experiences, 

and the balance between these two six month 

placements. 

Question 9: To what degree do you feel that the two 

placements compliment each other 

Probe: Can the program be structured to improve 

the overall fellowship experience 

Question 10: How useful were the connections you 

made during the program Do you still keep in 

touch with fellows from your participating class 

Question 11: How could the Congressional Hunger 

Center be of value to you as you move along in 

your career Is there anything they could do to 

help you stay connected with your class of fellows 

Question 12: The Congressional Hunger Center is 

interested in determining whether this fellowship 

program has played a significant role in helping 

their participants get started in their careers. From 

your perspective, how did participating in the 

National Hunger Fellows Program impact your 

career 

Question 13: Is there anything else you’d like for 

us to know about your experience with the 





Board of Directors 

Question 1: Please tell me about your involvement 

with the Congressional Hunger Center. 

Probe: How long have you been a board member 


Emerson National Hunger Fellows program 

Probe: If there were one thing you could change 

about the program, what would it be 

Question 3: What is your vision for the Emerson 

National Hunger Fellows program 

Probe: What changes would you like to see over the 

next couple of years 

Question 4: What do you believe to be the strengths of 

the fellowship program 

Question 5: From your perspective, what sets this program 

apart from other leadership programs 

Probe: What is the unique nature of this program 

Question 6: In your opinion, what impact are the 

Fellows having on the fight against hunger 

Probe: What do you believe to be the value-added 

of this fellowship program towards the fight 

against hunger 

Question 7: What changes to the Fellowship program 

have you noticed over the course of your involvement 

with the Congressional Hunger Center 

Probe: How did these changes impact your role as a 

Board Member 

Question 8: What benefits have you derived from 

being a Board Member 

Question 9: What advice do you have for how CHC 

can enhance greater Board participation in 

Fellowship activities and events 




Former Program Directors 

Question 1: I understand that you are a former 

program director for the Congressional Hunger 

Center. Can you tell me about your experience as 

program director 

Probe: How long were you involved in the program 

as program director (timeframe) 

Question 2: Are you still involved with the 


Probe: Please describe your involvement. 





Question 4: What were the biggest challenges you 

faced as program director 

Question 5: From your perspective, how effective was 

the structure of the Hunger Fellows Program during 

the time you were Program Director 

Probe: In what ways can the program be improved 

Question 8: What sets this program apart from other 

leadership programs 


Question 9: What impact do you believe this program 

is having on the lives of the participating fellows 



with the program 

Probe: How did these changes impact your role as 

program director 






Question 12: Are there any other insights about the 

program you’d like to share with us 





placements. 


placements complimented each other 

Probe: Does it make sense to make the field and 

policy components of the program more connected 

Probe: Can the program be structured in a way to 

improve the overall fellowship experience 

Question 7: From your perspective, how important 

is the “Fellowship” component (i.e. community 

building aspect) f the program Do you have 

advice on how to enhance this component of the 

program 




Site Supervisors 

Question 1: How have you been involved with the 


Probe: How long have you been a site supervisor 

Question 2: Please tell me about your role as a site 

supervisor for the Fellowship Program. 

Probe: Is there any way that the Congressional 

Hunger Center can further assist you in your role 

as site supervisor 









placements. 


placements compliment each other 

Probe: Can the program be structured to improve 

the overall fellowship experience 

Question 5: Do you have any suggestions on how to 

improve the current structure of the program 

Question 6: What are some of the accomplishments 

of the fellows you have worked with during their 

time with your organization 

Probe: What type of projects have they been 

involved in 

Probe: Can you give us any examples of how 

they have been able to demonstrate leadership 

during the course of their placement with your 

organization 

Question 7: Did the Hunger Fellows you have hosted 

come to you with adequate training 

Question 8: Did you receive adequate communication 

from Program Directors 

Question 9: From your perspective, what sets this program 

apart from other leadership programs 




with the program 

Probe: How have these changes impacted your role 

as a site supervisor 






Question 12: Is there anything else you’d like to share 

with us about the Hunger Fellows Program 


Appendix 2: Alumni Survey Results 

Table 1. Survey Respondents by Class Year of Participation 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 

Class 1 (Year ’94-’95) 7 5.7 5.7 5.7 

Class 2 (Year ’95-’96) 12 9.8 9.8 15.6 

Class 3 (Year ’96-’97) 16 13.1 13.1 28.7 

Class 4 (Year ’97-’98) 9 7.4 7.4 36.1 

Class 5 (Year ’98-’99) 12 9.8 9.8 45.9 

Class 6 (Year ’99-’00) 12 9.8 9.8 55.7 

Class 7 (Year ’00-’01) 19 15.6 15.6 71.3 

Class 8 (Year ’01-’02) 19 15.6 15.6 86.9 

Class 9 (Year ’02-’03) 16 13.1 13.1 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 2. Number of Fellows who have Pursued a Graduate Degree 

Since Completing Program 


Yes 72 59.0 59.0 59.0 

No 50 41.0 41.0 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 3. When Did Fellows Pursue Their Graduate Degrees 

Frequency 

Percent 

Within one year of completing fellowship 19 27 

Currently enrolled in graduate program 35 50 

Other 16 23 

Total 70 100 


Table 4. Degree Pursued After Fellowship 


JD 15 12.3 12.3 12.3 

MD 8 6.6 6.6 18.9 

MPP/MPA 9 7.4 7.4 26.2 

MSW 6 4.9 4.9 31.1 

MPH 8 6.6 6.6 37.7 

Other 24 19.7 19.7 57.4 

Not Applicable 50 41.0 41.0 98.4 

No Response 2 1.6 1.6 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 5. Did Fellowship influence Decision to Pursue Graduate Degree 


Yes 49 40.2 40.2 40.2 

No 22 18.0 18.0 58.2 

Not applicable 50 41.0 41.0 99.2 

No Response 1 .8 .8 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 6. Sectors Fellows have Worked in Since Graduating from Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Nonprofit Sector 63 52 

Public Sector 11 9 

Both Sectors 38 31 

Neither Sector 10 8 

Total 122 100 

Table 7. Activities Fellows have Participated in since Completing Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Served on Board of Directors for social justice organization 15 12 

Served in another leadership role (i.e. Advisory Board, Board of 

Trustees, etc.) 

Published or edited an article or book to advance a particular social 

justice cause 

Participated in a conference as a presenter or panelist advocating a 


34 28 

31 26 

51 42 

Volunteered personal time for a social justice cause 106 88 

Volunteered professional services to a social justice cause/organization 57 47 

Served as a leader in an organization pursuing social justice (as staff 

member or volunteer) 

75 62 

Lobbied public officials on behalf of a social justice cause 60 50 

Engaged in other advocacy activities (i.e. education campaigns, 

demonstrations, etc.) 

Each row represents a separate variable. 

85 70 


Table 8. What Fellows did within First Year of Completing Fellowship Program 


Attended graduate school 22 18.0 18.0 18.0 

Obtained employment 78 63.9 63.9 82.0 

Both 9 7.4 7.4 89.3 

Other 13 10.7 10.7 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 9. Sector of Employment in First Year after Fellowship 


Private sector 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 

Nonprofit sector 65 53.3 53.3 55.7 

Public sector 19 15.6 15.6 71.3 


Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 10. Industry that Best Describes Line of Work 1st Year after Fellowship 


Advocacy 21 17.2 17.2 17.2 

Consulting 2 1.6 1.6 18.9 

Education 8 6.6 6.6 25.4 

Foundation/Grant Making 4 3.3 3.3 28.7 

Government 12 9.8 9.8 38.5 

Health Services 4 3.3 3.3 41.8 

Information Technology 1 .8 .8 42.6 

International Development/Relief 2 1.6 1.6 44.3 

Legal Services 2 1.6 1.6 45.9 

Social Services 10 8.2 8.2 54.1 

Other 21 17.2 17.2 71.3 


Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 11. Extent to which First Job after Fellowship Addressed Anti-hunger or other 

Related Social Justice Issues 


Not at all 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 

Not much 11 9.0 9.0 11.5 

Somewhat 15 12.3 12.3 23.8 

A great deal 58 47.5 47.5 71.3 


Total 122 100.0 100.0 


Table 12. Current Employment/Graduate School Status of Alumni 


Working full-time 71 58.2 58.2 58.2 

Working part-time 3 2.5 2.5 60.7 

Attending graduate school 29 23.8 23.8 84.4 

Both working & attending school 15 12.3 12.3 96.7 

Not currently employed 2 1.6 1.6 98.4 

Other 2 1.6 1.6 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 13. Current Sector of Employment for Program Alumni 


Private sector 17 13.9 13.9 13.9 

Nonprofit sector 59 48.4 48.4 62.3 

Public sector 13 10.7 10.7 73.0 


Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 14. Extent to which Current Position Addresses Anti-Hunger/Other Related 

Social Justice Issues 


Not at all 8 6.6 6.6 6.6 

Not much 12 9.8 9.8 16.4 

Somewhat 19 15.6 15.6 32.0 

A great deal 50 41.0 41.0 73.0 


Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 15. Ways in which Participation in Fellowship Program has Impacted 

Career of Participants 

The program provided an opportunity to gain first-hand field 

experience 

The program introduced me to key players/organizations in the antihunger/poverty 

field 

The program provided outlets for me to stay involved in anti-hunger/ 

poverty issues after the completion of the fellowship 

The program helped me make educated decisions regarding my career 

path 

Each row represents a separate question. Row percents add up to 100% 

Frequency 

Percent 

90 74 

92 76 

60 50 

98 81 


Table 16. Benefits Provided to Participants of the National Hunger Fellows Program 


network 



An understanding of hunger & 

poverty at the local level 


poverty at the national level 

An understanding of how to 

alleviate hunger & poverty in 

the U.S. 

A commitment to working for a 




Direct knowledge, experience 

& skills that helped fellows find 

employment after the program 

was over 

Strongly Agree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree 

Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq % 

0 0 6 5 12 10 53 43 51 42 

0 0 2 2 6 5 51 42 63 52 

0 0 2 2 9 7 46 38 65 53 

0 0 1 1 3 2 45 37 72 60 

0 0 6 5 13 11 78 64 25 20 

0 0 3 2 14 11 42 34 63 52 

0 0 2 2 7 6 43 35 70 57 

2 2 9 7 20 16 39 32 52 43 

Each row represents a separate variable. Row percentages should equal 100% (percentages maybe skewed due to rounding). 

Table 17. Did Experience/Knowledge Gained from the Field Placement Contribute to 

your Experience/Knowledge During your Policy Placement 


Valid Yes 92 75.4 75.4 75.4 

No 26 21.3 21.3 96.7 

No Response 4 3.3 3.3 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 18. Extent to which Fellows Benefited from the Combination of the Field and 

Policy Placement 


Not much 2 1.6 1.6 1.6 

Somewhat 19 15.6 15.6 17.2 

A great deal 101 82.8 82.8 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 


Table 19. Frequency with which Alumni have Stayed Engaged in Congressional Hunger Center Activities 

Never Occasionally Often Not Applicable 

Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq % 

Participated in the alumni listserv 51 42 61 50 8 7 2 2 

Participated in training & 

professional development of 


Participated in the recruitment 

and/or selection of fellows 

Participated as a field or policy 

site supervisor 

Participated as a Program 

Advisory Board Member 

66 54 40 33 13 11 3 2 

50 41 54 45 15 12 2 2 

103 86 8 7 3 3 6 5 

110 91 5 4 2 2 4 3 

Donated funds to CHC 91 76 17 14 4 3 7 6 

Provided in-kind services to CHC 91 76 17 14 4 3 7 6 

Attended an event or party 

sponsored by CHC 

*Each row represents a separate variable. Row percentages should equal 100% (percentages maybe skewed due to rounding). 

43 35 56 46 20 16 3 2 

Table 20. Level of Support Received from CHC after Completion of Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Not enough support 38 31 

Adequate support 54 44 

Plenty of support 26 21 

No response 4 3 

Total 122 100 

Percentages have been rounded to nearest whole number 

Table 21. Frequency of Alumni who have Developed Contacts as a Result of 

Participating in the National Hunger Fellows Program 


Yes 101 82.8 82.8 82.8 

No 21 17.2 17.2 100.0 

Total 122 100.0 100.0 

Table 22. Level of Support Received from CHC in Helping Past Participants Maintain 

their Alumni Network 

Frequency 

Percent 

Not enough support 38 32 

Adequate support 54 46 

Plenty of support 26 22 

Total 118 100 


Table 23. Percentage of Alumni who Developed a Network of Peer Contacts as a 

Result of Participating in Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Yes 101 83 

No 21 17 

Total 122 100 

Table 24. Frequency with which Alumni Rely on Network for Resources and 

Information 

Frequency 

Percent 

Hardly Ever 21 17 

About once a year 23 19 

Several times a year 42 34 

At least once a month 15 12 

Not applicable 21 17 

Total 122 100 

‘Not applicable’ refers to alumni who answered ‘no’ in Table 22. Percentages have been rounded to nearest whole number 

Table 25. Level of Support by Class 

Not Enough Support Adequate/Plenty of Support Total 

Class Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent* 

1 5 83% 1 16% 6 100% 

2 6 50% 6 50% 12 100% 

3 5 33% 10 66% 15 100% 

4 4 44% 5 55% 9 100% 

5 5 41% 7 58% 12 100% 

6 4 40% 6 60% 10 100% 

7 3 15% 16 84% 19 100% 

8 4 21% 15 78% 19 100% 

9 2 12% 14 87% 16 100% 

Total 38 32% 80 67% 118 100% 

*Percentages have been rounded. Each row adds up to 100 percent 

Table 26. Reliance on Peer Network 

How often alumni rely on network Number of Responses Percentage 

Hardly ever 21 21% 

About once a year 23 23% 

Several times a year 42 42% 

At least once a month 15 15% 

Total 101 100% 


Appendix 3: Current Fellow Survey Results 

Table 1. How Current Participants Heard about Fellowship Program 

Frequency 

Percent 

On-campus recruiter 0 0 

College professor 1 4 

Promotional literature 4 17 

Job fair 2 9 

Friend 5 22 

Alumni of the program 3 13 

Career web page 4 17 

Other 9 39 

Each category is not mutually exclusive. Respondents had the option of selecting more than one answer option. 

Breakdown of “Other” Category from Table 1 

1 Field Site Supervisor 

2 Student Coalition Against Hunger and Homelessness 

3 Fellowship policy site host 

4 Hunger center website 

5 NSCAHH website 

6 Worked @ CHC 

7 staff attending a conference 

8 mentioned in a campus public service newsletter 

9 Office of Fellowships at my college 

Table 2. What Fellows Plan on doing after Completion of Program 


Attend graduate school 7 30.4 30.4 30.4 

Obtain employment 11 47.8 47.8 78.3 

Attend graduate school & 

seek employment 

3 13.0 13.0 91.3 

Other 2 8.7 8.7 100.0 

Total 23 100.0 100.0 


Table 3. Type of Graduate Degree Fellows Plan on Pursuing after Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

JD 4 57 

MD 2 29 

MPP/MPA 0 0 

MSW 0 0 

MPH 1 14 

Total 7* 100 

*This total represents the number of current fellows who plan on attending graduate school immediately after completing the fellowship program. 

Table 4. Sector in which Current Fellows Plan on Seeking Employment 

Frequency 

Percent 

Private Sector 1 9 

Nonprofit Sector 8 73 

Public Sector 2 18 

Total 11* 100 

*This total represents the number of current fellows who plan on seeking employment immediately after completing the fellowship program. 

Table 5. Industry Fellows would like to Work in After Completion of Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Advocacy 1 18 

Consulting 1 9 

Education 2 18 

Government 2 18 

Health Services 1 9 

International Development/Relief 2 18 

Other 5 45 


1 Community Development 

2 economic development (possibly international) 

3 undecided 

4 grassroots organizing 

5 economic development/community development 

Table 6. Percentage of Fellows that Plan to Continue their Involvement in 

Anti-hunger/poverty Issues after Completion of the Program 

Question: Do you think you will continue to be involved in 

anti-hunger/poverty issues after you complete the program Frequency Percent 

Yes 23 100 

No 0 0 


Table 7. How Current Fellows Plan on Being Involved in Anti-hunger/poverty Issues 

after Completion of the Program 

Frequency 

Percent 

As a volunteer 3 13 

As a staff member 15 65 

Other 5 22 

Total 23 100 


1 Could be either, not sure yet. 

2 Will try to combine healthcare and poverty 

3 Activist 

4 Policy maker and professor 

5 Not sure yet—probably both 

6 I will be in school, but I will be involved 

Table 8. The National Hunger Fellows Program is Providing Fellows with . . . 

Direct Knowledge, experience 

and skills that will enable me 

to find employment after the 

program is over 


network 



Guidance to make more 

informed career choices 


poverty at the local level 


poverty at the national level 

An understanding of how to 

alleviate hunger and poverty in 

the U.S. 

A commitment to working for a 

social cause 



Strongly Agree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree 

Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq % Freq % 

0 0 1 4 0 0 6 26 16 70 

0 0 0 0 1 4 6 26 16 70 

0 0 0 0 0 0 4 17 19 83 

0 0 1 4 3 13 13 57 6 26 

0 0 0 0 0 0 8 35 15 65 

0 0 0 0 1 4 6 26 16 17 

0 0 0 0 3 13 9 39 11 48 

0 0 1 4 0 0 6 26 16 70 

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 13 20 87 

Each row represents a separate variable. Row percentages should equal 100% (percentages maybe skewed due to rounding errors). 


Table 9. Most Valuable Aspect of Field Placement for Current Fellows 

# Response 

1 Getting to learn about approaches to fighting poverty that I previously knew nothing about. 

2 The opportunity to gain a greater understanding of the many levels at which hunger and poverty are 

combated though experience working with others involved in this fight. 

3 The opportunity to work on local issues autonomously was awesome. 

4 Learning from my executive director about local politics, coalition building, and advocating for change. 

5 The most valuable aspect of my field placement was the opportunity to work with my supervisor. She is 

not only passionate but savvy and effective and I really look to her as a mentor. 

6 Was able to gain and understanding and grasp of a wide array of issues. Did not work directly with hunger 

issues, but gained great experience in poverty issues as a whole. 

7 grassroots hands on work 

8 The opportunity to work with local organizations, community members, and children because this 

experience has taught me the benefits and limits of doing community outreach. 

9 The opportunity to learn about the amount of change that can be accomplished on the local/state level. 

10 Having a chance to see the different ways local groups collaborate and support each other to address 

hunger and poverty. 

11 Incredible mentors. 

12 Getting a wide perspective on the issue of hunger from my various coworkers 

13 The independence of having a project that would be directly used by an organization and people who 

have been working in the anti-hunger field for multiple years. 

14 Working with and understanding the broad range of interactions occurring among groups at the local, 

state and national levels was incredibly valuable. Understanding the intersection of all three interests was 

a phenomenal learning experience. In working with a local food bank, a state wide advocacy organization 

and the USDA, I was able to see how each group comes in with different interests, focused on the same 

goal of alleviating hunger, and how this all plays out. 

15 The most valuable aspect was the relationships I was able to build with co-workers and other community 

members in an environment of caring and justice. 

16 Having a lot of trust and responsibility. 

17 Being in the midst of people in need while trying to help at the same time. 

18 making connections with organizations in a new city. 

19 Learning how a private organization/operation dedicated to social work is operated and maintained. 

20 The incredible group of people I met and worked with. 

21 The composition of my project, working with government, a food bank, and a state advocacy group, gave 

me a unique perspective that will inform how I create policy and think for the rest of my life. 

22 I received a valuable experience working in a small-nonprofit organization. 


Table 10. Least Valuable Aspect of Field Placement for Current Fellows 

# Response 

1 Everything was valuable. Even the very few negative experiences taught me something. 

2 I’m unsure of the value of my Hunger Free Community Report as of yet, but I’m just finishing it now, so I 

may come to better appreciate it down the road. 

3 Difficulty communicating with my field site supervisor during the initial few months of my placement was 

a challenge. Higher expectations for communication between the CHC, fellows & supervisors would have 

helped. 

4 Administrative work which was unrelated to the fellowship that my boss asked me to do. 

5 My field site placement has been incredible. I can’t think of anything I would change. 

6 career help, some extraneous work (already planned on attending med school) 

7 lack of resources 

8 A few of the conferences that I attended, though important in themselves, did not provide me with 

a concrete understanding of how I can help. Many of the conferences opened up dialogue without 

providing solutions, or even potential solutions. 

9 While I think it was good that we had to complete a report at the end of our time in the field—I felt 

like I really only spent 3–4 months actually in the field, and then the last month or two working on 

summarizing my field work in my HFCR. 

10 There wasn’t a least valuable aspect of my field placement. 

11 Can’t think of one. 

12 I think the actual placement (i.e. the town) had little value to my experience as a whole. 

13 Spending a majority of my time in an office. Although I had the opportunity to some interviews with food 

stamp and food pantry clients, I wish I had more of a chance to interact with people. 

14 The lack of structure at the local level. 

15 The long, stressful hours. 

16 unclear/vague work plan. 

17 lack of connection to other fellows during placement 

18 All of it was valuable. Taken as a whole, it was invaluable! 

19 social barriers 

20 A supervisor that while great, really micromanaged me. 

21 I did not feel there was enough direct service or exposure to the community. 

Table 11. Extent to which Current Fellows Feel they will Benefit from the 

Combination of their Field and Policy Placements 

Percent 

Frequency 

Not at all 0 0 

Not much 0 0 

Somewhat 1 4 

A great deal 22 96 

Total 23 100 


Table 12. What Current Fellows would Change about the Program 

# Response 

1 More non-food field placements . . . but I think they’re moving towards that. A greater emphasis on the 

connection between alleviating hunger and other social and economic efforts going on in the US. 

2 Better opportunities for fellows to give input into field site placements. 

3 I would make the program 14 months long so that the field and policy site portions could be a full sixmonths 

each 

4 I will tell the Hunger Center staff this too, but I think perhaps releasing a press release to all of our staff 

people on our first day and asking them to distribute it to the rest of the staff (this would also help 

differentiate b/t fellows and interns) 

5 I wouldn’t change a thing. 

6 Publicize it more as a poverty fellowship- many people may shy away from applying because they assume 

it will only concern hunger. Calling it the Bill Emerson Poverty Fellowship would bring in many more 

interested applicants I believe. 

7 I would extend the program to a two year program, providing the fellows with a year at each placement. 

This will provide the fellows with an opportunity to complete a more in-depth work plan and even see 

some of the tangible outcomes of their work. 

8 More development of community among the fellows. 

9 Perhaps make it longer. 

10 Give more opportunities to people of color. The stipend makes it very hard for low-income individuals to 

participate in a program with so little benefits. 

11 I would make the August training more engaging with more discussion and more community building 

activities. 

12 It is an impeccably run program. The support we receive from the CHC is unsurpassed in other similar 

programs. I suppose the only thing I would change, again, would be to have more direct service contact. 

13 It can be quite intense for some fellows in the field to both live and work together—perhaps consider 

giving them a bit of space. Also, I’d suggest only assigning two to a supervisor if that supervisor is truly 

prepared to take on the commitment of supervising two fellows. 

14 Rethinking the trainings to be more heavy on the reading and discussion rather than constant speakers. 

15 More monetary assistance with housing and transportation in DC. 

16 Make the health and dental insurance more affordable. The co-pays for prescriptions are too high. And 

since it is based on a network in DC it is prohibitively expensive to use the dental insurance during field 

site placements. One visit can cost half a month’s stipend. 

17 I’d like to see the fellows all in a single city during the field site placements. It’d be an opportunity to 

make a staggering difference in a city for 6 months. All of our projects were interesting and great, but 20+ 

fellows in a single town for 6 months could achieve a blow your mind away progress in the area. 

18 to be able to lobby! 

19 Perhaps a little better communication of supervisor responsibilities and roles before fellows arrive. They 

often seem to not read the materials that they are given. A phone call explaining the role of the fellows, 

how much ownership and what types of work it is ok for them to do, would be really helpful. 

20 The fellowship should ensure the field placements have structured work plans and the capacity to host 

fellows. 


Table 13. Activities Current Fellows Think they will be Involved in after 

Completing Fellowship 

Frequency 

Percent 

Participating in the alumni listserv 21 91 

Training and professional development of future hunger fellows 21 91 

Recruiting and/or selecting future hunger fellows 20 87 

Serving as a field or policy site supervisor for future hunger fellows 7 30 

Collaborating professionally with CHC 17 74 

Contributing funding to CHC 11 48 

Attending events or parties sponsored by CHC 22 96 

Reading and/or contributing to the CHC Newsletter or NHF Alumni 

Newsletter 

Categories are not mutually exclusive. Respondents had the option of selecting more than one answer option. 

20 87 

Table 14. Level of Connection with Community of Peers among Current Fellows 

Frequency 

Percent 

Not connected at all 0 0 

Not very connected 0 0 

Somewhat connected 11 48 

Very connected 12 52 

Total 23 100 

Table 15. Extent to which Current Fellows Believe they will Stay in Touch with 

Members of their Class after Program is Complete 

Frequency 

Percent 

Definitely no 0 0 

Probably no 2 9 

Probably yes 11 48 

Definitely yes 10 43 

Total 23 100 


Appendix 4: Evaluation Plan 

Evaluation Questions Source of Data Data Collection Method 

How does participating in the National Hunger 

Fellows program benefit fellows 

Does the program provide fellows with the 

knowledge, experience and skills needed to 

find employment after the program is over 

Does the program provide participants 

with an increased understanding of how 


To what extent does the program help 

broaden the professional network of 

participating fellows 

Are graduates of the program able to 

leverage their experience to get into a 

graduate program of their choice 

• Graduates of the program 

• Current fellows 

• Program staff 

• Site supervisors 

• Former Program Directors 

Design and administer an on-line survey 

to be distributed to all graduates of the 

program. 

Select a sample of responses and follow-up 

with an in-depth telephone interview. 

Design and administer a survey to all current 

fellows. 

Interview staff members where appropriate 

(some of these have already been 

completed). 

How did the experience of the National 

Hunger Fellows program impact past 

participants 

To what degree was the fellowship program 

a stimulus for the work alumni are currently 

involved in 

Did the Emerson program influence their 

career path 

What impact did the Emerson fellowship 

experience have on the lives of those who 

participated 





program. 





completed). 

To what degree did National Hunger Fellows 

program help foster leaders in the field 

To what extent have current and past 

fellows impacted the fight against hunger 

To what extent are graduates of the 

Emerson program able to make a difference 

in social justice issues 

Has the Emerson program been successful in 

creating leaders in the field 

Has the program been instrumental in 

training fellows to be key players in the fight 







program. 





completed). 


Evaluation Questions Source of Data Data Collection Method 

To what extent does participation in the 

National Hunger Fellows program increase the 

overall awareness on specific hunger related 

issues among participating fellows 






program. 



Design and administer a survey to all current 

fellows. 

How is the current structure of the National 

Hunger Fellows program working 

Can the Emerson program design be 

improved to better connect fellows’ field 

and policy experiences 

How have the changes that have occurred 

over the past ten years impacted the 

fellowship program 




• Board of Directors 

Conduct telephone interviews with a sample 

of Board members. 

Conduct interviews with a sample of 

graduates. of the program. 

Survey of current fellows. 

How is the National Hunger Fellows program 

unique from other such programs 

How does this program contribute to the 

fight against hunger 

• Board of Directors 



Conduct telephone interviews with a sample 

of Board members. 

Conduct interviews with a sample of 

graduates of the program. 



229 1 ⁄2 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE 


202-547-7022 

www.hungercenter.org

old CHC report - Innovation Network

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?